explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3046: Stromatolites

2025-02-05T11:04:23Z

172.70.206.163: explain why

Yay, another Beret Guy appearance! '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 03:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'm trying to remember Bloom County and the penguin (Opus) or Snoopy by Schulz because of the last panel. Shrug. Prolly both. Warm is good. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.208|172.70.175.208]] 06:08, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:Add Zonker to this list? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.39|108.162.245.39]] 17:29, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:: Zonker Harris, yes! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.106|172.70.175.106]] 18:16, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

How can anybody be related to rock formations? Stomatolites are not organisms, they are the product of organisms. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.88|141.101.105.88]] 08:12, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:This might be one of Randall's weaker offerings in terms of scientific accuracy. I think that "stromatolites" as here used refers to the cyanobacterial component of stromatolites, which is the component detected in ancient fossils and is the one responsible for oxygen-evolving photosynthesis (responsible for what was perhaps the {{w|Great_Oxidation_Event|first global environmental catastrophe}} - an element of ancestry of which it might be wise not to boast). Modern stromatolites have both cyanobacteria (ancestors of plastids) and alpha-proteobacteria (ancestors of mitochondria) in their microbial mats, and it's reasonable to assume that alpha-proteobacteria were present in the fossils. So the "cousins" would be of cyanobacteria in the stromatolites, not the stromatolites themselves (in which both were, presumably, cohabiting). Beret Guy also appears to be confused about the proposed sequence of events leading to the origins of mitochondria and eukaryotic cell nuclei. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.39|108.162.245.39]] 17:29, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:I've seen the surviving microbial mats in Australia referred to as "stromatolites" as well.[[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 12:39, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I wonder if he is related to any specific dinosaurs or whether he bypassed that branch of the tree completely. 09:48, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I think there's a joke (or at least a reference) here about the relatedness of life. All currently-known organisms are related by descent from a common ancestor, which in English makes us all cousins, of various distances. Mitochondria in plants and animals, for instance, must descend from the same bacterium-like organism that became an endosymbiont in a proto-eukaryote.[[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 12:39, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
:Since mitochondria and chloroplasts were both originally distinct organisms that were absorbed into the host cells, that makes most modern life descendants of cannibals. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:37, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
::By that logic, eating pretty much any food except salt (and maybe dairy?) is cannibalism. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.70.87|172.68.70.87]] 16:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I immediately thought of [https://fabpedigree.com/ Fabulous Pedigree], which ''does'' include ancestry (and side-branches) going back to (and past) mitochondria, though from a quick check it doesn't seem to specifically include stromatolites. Obviously the listing has lots of (mostly implied) gaps. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.217.72|162.158.217.72]] 13:55, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Beret Guy is emulating Pooh-Bah in The Mikado: "I can trace my ancestry back to a protoplasmal primordial atomic globule."[[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.190|172.69.33.190]] 19:07, 4 February 2025 (UTC)NickM

I've added a bit about the length of time it would need to take to click that far back in the past. I'm sure I have got the amount out by several orders of magnitude, so I would appreciate it if anyone fancies a go at estimating how long Beret Guy would have taken. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.27|172.71.241.27]] 10:49, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
: [[2608: Family Reunion]] estimates about 50 billion generations to the MRCA with plants; this would have taken about a century at a speed of 15 clicks per second. Bacteria reproduce extremely fast - or at least modern ones do - which could easily add a few trillion generations (and a few thousand years of clicking) on the bacterial side of the ancestry. In other words, "thousands of years" is likely an overestimate but not ''that'' much of one. (Obviously the time becomes very feasible if Beret Guy used a site that summarized the ancestry.) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.134|162.158.111.134]] 20:25, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
::Typically the way it works is you work back so far and then find a connection to a ''pre-existing'' tree, so he wouldn't need to go very far back to get to a tree that covered all modern humans, provided someone had already done the work beyond that point before him.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.29|172.70.91.29]] 10:27, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Six paragraphs should be four. Too much non-explanatory and otherwise pointless digression. I'm sure the people who write it don't realize how much it turns off people coming here to read an explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.215.72|172.70.215.72]] 11:03, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

== The [[What If? chapters|What If? article index]] project ==

Hey everyone,

I'm not sure if you noticed the banner of the site, but for the last few weeks a group of [[Talk:What If? chapters|incredibly talented editors]] have been redesigning the [[What If? chapters|'''index of ''What If?'' articles''']] from the ground up. Among other things, we've merged two huge tables, added a TON of additional info, created complex templates, and made [[What If? chapters|dozens and dozens of other improvements]]. I believe that, as a wiki, we should have a complete and detailed index of all what if? articles, [[List of all comics (full)|just like we do for the comics]], and we're getting so close to that goal! We mostly only need to add the missing explanations, improve the existing ones, and add the questions and answer summary from the books (plus other things).

We would love your help (especially if you have the first book)! We've prepared a [[What If? chapters|to-do list]] at the top of the page, containing everything that needs to be done, if you're interested. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 07:00, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

3029: Sun Avoidance

2024-12-29T21:11:06Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3029
| date = December 25, 2024
| title = Sun Avoidance
| image = sun_avoidance_2x.png
| imagesize = 311x403px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = C'mon, ESA Solar Orbiter team, just give the Parker probe a LITTLE nudge at aphelion. Crash it into the sun. Fulfill the dream of Icarus. It is your destiny.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SANTA BOT FLYING TOO CLOSE TO THE SUN (SKILL ISSUE). Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The comic humorously ranks space missions based on their ability to "avoid" the Sun, presenting it as a "Sun Avoidance Skill Leaderboard." Most space missions remain relatively far from the Sun, with distances in the tens of millions of kilometers. However, the {{w|Parker Solar Probe}} is listed at the bottom of the leaderboard because it has come significantly closer to the Sun than any other spacecraft, at just 6.17 million kilometers. The joke lies in framing this incredible scientific achievement as a "failure" in avoiding the Sun.

The missions listed include notable solar and planetary exploration spacecraft like {{w|Mariner 10}}, {{w|Helios 1}}, {{w|BepiColombo}}, {{w|MESSENGER}}, and {{w|Solar Orbiter}}. These missions, designed to study the Sun or its surroundings, are ranked by their closest approaches to the Sun. The comic highlights the vast difference between the Parker Solar Probe and all other missions, emphasizing its unprecedented proximity to the Sun as part of its mission to study the solar corona and solar wind.

The joke is to mischaracterize Parker's impressively close approach to the Sun as a failure to avoid it. Earth and everything on it travel at an {{w|Earth's orbit|average of 29.78 km/s}} in a direction 90 degrees to the direction of the Sun, and the majority of this "sideways" relative velocity must be shed to bring Parker's orbit closer to the Sun. Just to bring a mass of approximately 17 metric tons directly to an orbit crossing Mercury requires a rocket the size of the [https://launchercalculator.com/?rocket=NS1 Saturn V stack]. Parker masses about forty times that and it's Christmas 2024 perihelion was just 6.1 million kilometers versus Mercury's 46 million kilometers. The Parker mission designers needed an extremely ''high'' degree of skill to plot a course with very minor adjustments that resulted in the seven gravity assists from Venus that were needed to get this close to the Sun — and should rank well above all the missions that went nowhere near the Sun and therefore showed no skill avoiding it.

The caption text further expands on the joke by mockingly framing the Parker Solar Probe's proximity to the Sun as a skill-based failure. It suggests that its operators have demonstrated the "worst Sun avoidance skill" ever.
The title text references the Greek legend of {{w|Icarus}}, whose father crafted artificial wings so the two of them could fly out of the open-topped prison they were in. Icarus, despite his father's warnings, flew too high which, according to the myth, got him appreciably closer to the Sun where it was much hotter, hot enough to destroy Icarus's wings, which caused him to plummet from a very high altitude to his death. (As humanity has learned since then, the upper reaches of Earth's atmosphere are cold, not hot, and the distance from Earth's surface to the upper reaches of its atmosphere is only a tiny fraction of the total distance from the Earth to the Sun.) The caption text urges the operators of another satellite to use their satellite to alter the Parker Solar Probe's orbit to send it into the Sun, which would by definition lower the Parker Solar Probe's distance from the Sun to zero. Unfortunately, the Parker Solar Probe was only designed to get close to the Sun, not into it, and would be destroyed soon after entering the Sun if not before. Being destroyed would prevent the Parker Solar Probe from transmitting any further data, terminating its mission. Its operators would probably object to this.{{cn}}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Header:] Sun Avoidance Skill Leaderboard

:[A table with three columns, all with underlined headers.]
:Rank
:Mission
:Sun Nearest Miss
:[First 'row', 'Rank', is of extra height and over several lines, using vertical and horizontal ellipses between the two endpoints to indicate a range of ranks in the first column, the first visible digit of the larger number being cut off by the left frame edge:] 1. ⋮ … ⋮ 4303857.
:[Across both the 'Mission' and 'Sun Nearest Miss' columns, the first row has some text spread across two lines, within a framing pair of large square brackets to match the Rank range:] All other expeditions in human history
:[A simple row, with all three columns separately populated, the first column's Rank number is also cut off across the first visible digit.]
:4303858.
:Mariner-10
:69.0 million km
:[Another row, likewise.]
:4303859.
:Helios 1
:46.4 million km
:[Another row.]
:4303860.
:BepiColombo
:45.8 million km
:[Another row, with a yet more significant Ranking digit now partly visible due to non-proportional spacing, itself being cut off in the stead of the now fully visible next digit.]
:24303861.
:Messenger
:45.3 million km
:[Another row, back to the original pre-cutoff.]
:4303862.
:Solar Orbiter
:43.8 million km
:[Another row.]
:4303863.
:Helios 2
:43.3 million km
:[Final row.]
:4303864.
:Parker
:6.17 million km

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Congratulations to the Parker Solar Probe for setting a new record for "Worst Job Avoiding the Sun."

==Trivia==
*This comic was released on Christmas Day of 2024, but makes no reference to Christmas.
**This year marks the first time in xkcd's 20 year history (of releasing comics around Christmas), that there have been no [[:Category:Christmas|Christmas comics]] released during those days.
**Also all nine times before this year, when a release day fell on Christmas Day, that comic has always been about Christmas.
*If [[Randall]] found the accomplishments of the Parker Solar Probe more interesting than Christmas itself that might explain why this comic was released on Christmas Day instead.
**It is not the first space exploration accomplishment mentioned during Christmas, however, in the previous case [[2559: December 25th Launch]] from 2021, the comic was give seasonal spin. 

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Space probes]]

2797: Actual Progress

2023-07-03T18:25:21Z

172.70.206.163: /* Transcript */ science in general

{{comic
| number = 2797
| date = July 3, 2023
| title = Actual Progress
| image = actual_progress_2x.png
| imagesize = 512x232px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Slowly progressing from 'how do protons behave in relativistic collisions?' to 'what the heck are protons even doing when they're just sitting there?'
}}

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

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

:[Cueball is sitting on an office chair at a desk and has his hand on a laptop. Ponytail is standing behind him.]
:Cueball: When I started this morning, there were a few edge cases I was confused about.

:[Panel of just Cueball sitting on the office chair.]
:Cueball: But now after a full day of research,

:[Same scene as in the first panel, but Cueball has his hand on his lap.]
:Cueball: I'm confused about all the regular cases, too.
:Ponytail: Ah, '''''actual''''' progress!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Physics]]

2796: Real Estate Analysis

2023-06-30T16:14:38Z

172.70.206.163: /* Transcript */ cat

{{comic
| number = 2796
| date = June 30, 2023
| title = Real Estate Analysis
| image = real_estate_analysis_2x.png
| imagesize = 474x458px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Mars does get a good score on 'noise levels' and 'scenic views,' but the school district ranking isn't great; the only teacher--the Perseverance rover--is too busy with rock samples to teach more than the occasional weekend class.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an EASILY IMPRESSED URBANIST - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic shows a chart ranking locations around our solar system, along two scales: Their walkability & their proximity to shops.

Earth is rated as more walkable than other locations within our solar system, probably because humans can walk on much of its surface without immediate & continuous existential need for environmental survival gear (so far) and because its surface hosts all commercial establishments known to humans.

The alt text comments that Mars did score high on the 'noise levels' and 'scenic views' scores: Having a thinner atmosphere and having (close to) zero sources of manmade noise, Mars is certainly silent, a quality that is desirable when searching for a home as lower noise levels help maintain a calm and relaxed lifestyle, and its large, barren scenery has been abundantly documented by the several rovers sent to its surface. However, it then states the 'school district' ranking (proximity to quality educational structures, which is also desirable especially by families) is rather poor on account of there being only one available teacher - the rover Perseverance - and it being too busy with its rock samples. Perseverance is (at the time of this comic's publication) a still-active rover whose main purpose is to examine minerals from Mars' surface and scan them for signs compatible with ancient life: while it could hypotetically serve as a teacher (using its memory banks as teaching material, for instance), doing so would greatly interfere with its main mission if done regularly.

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

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Astronomy]]
[[Category: Mars rovers]]

2790: Heat Pump

2023-06-16T23:26:19Z

172.70.206.163: /* Transcript */ color

{{comic
| number = 2790
| date = June 16, 2023
| title = Heat Pump
| image = heat_pump_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x400px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = If I'm not going to upgrade to a powered one, I should at LEAST stop leaving the door open so often.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BIG CHUNGUS HEAT PUMPER - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
A {{w|heat pump}} is a system which applies the {{w|ideal gas law}} to transfer heat from a relatively cold area to a relatively hot area, i.e. to heat an insufficiently warm room/building or to cool an insufficiently chilled room/building, even if the outside air is at the opposite heat-gradient for the purpose. The extra energy used to achieve this prevents the {{w|second law of thermodynamics}} from being violated, and is usually assumed to be added to the warmer side of the system. This is why the back of a refrigerator will feel hot, as it maintains the cooler internal temperature (and why leaving its door open does not cool the room that it is in down, just heats it up as it fruitlessly attempts to both heat and cool the same air-mass).

In this comic, [[Cueball]] has a ''manual'' heat pump, and he is manually heating an area by walking from the warm area (colored in ''red'') to a colder area (colored in ''blue''), and "drawing" residual heat into the "bellows" / accordion-shaped device by expanding them to cool them below the outside air temperature (more intense blue). He then returns back to the warm area and compresses the bellows to concentrate heat above the sustained room-temperature (more intense red), then letting it radiate away and increasing room temperature before going back outside to repeat the process of drawing heat out of the cooler air. As expected, this is a laborious process, as captioned in the text below the panel. Manual heat pumps of this kind do not exist in real life, but are partly emulated by devices such as {{w|fire piston}}s. The {{w|air source heat pump}} effectively does the same thing as this comic, but by using components installed across a wall (letting fluids/vapors flow between the two sides) rather than moving physical components through doors.

The title text refers to the problem of having to open the door to carry the device in and out. This would let the warmed air flow out, and cool air flow in, to undo some of the effort used to attempt to increase the difference. In leiu of some device that does not require the door to be opened at all, he should at least promptly close it between each passage through it.

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

:[Cueball indoors (light red background) holding a light red accordion-shaped device in his hands and walking towards an open door.]

:[Cueball outdoors (light blue background) with the door closed, the device is still light red.]

:[Cueball extends the device and it turns blue.]
:''Release''

:[Cueball looks behind while the device has turned light blue.]

:[Cueball walking back inside through an open door, the device is still light blue.]

:[Cueball indoors with the door closed. He squeezes the device and it turns red.]
:''Squeeze''

:[Cueball looks at the door while the device is glowing in bright red.]
:''Radiate''

:[Cueball is leaving the indoors area (now a slightly darker red background) through an open door.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Manual heat pumps are such a pain.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Physics]]

2654: Chemtrails

2022-10-01T06:19:44Z

172.70.206.163: Copyedit

{{comic
| number = 2654
| date = August 3, 2022
| title = Chemtrails
| image = chemtrails.png
| titletext = Ants have reverse chemtrails--regular citizens spraying chemicals everywhere they go to control the government.
}}

==Explanation==

{{w|Entomologist}}s study insects. {{w|Ant}}s are insects that leave chemical trails to and from food sources or other events. These chemical trails can guide other ants in their colony, for instance, to return to food. Biologists call such signaling chemicals {{w|pheromones}}. This comic uses the word chemtrail as a shortening of chemical trail. [[Cueball]] is intentionally conflating ant chemical trails with {{w|chemtrails}}, the subject of a fallacious conspiracy theory that the government controls the population by spraying toxic or mind-/body-transformative chemicals from high altitude aircraft.

That myth may be partly based on the practice of {{w|cloud seeding}}, which uses chemical flares containing silver nitrate to attempt to increase precipitation,[https://www.vox.com/videos/23290459/cloud-seeding-manmade-rain-future-perfect] on studies of chemical mind control among ants,[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022191016301640] or on the effects of the common parasite ''{{w|toxoplasma gondii}}'' on cats' prey. Despite [[1677: Contrails|occasional conflation]], chemtrails are distinct from "contrails," short for "condensation trails," which are cloud-like lines in the sky created by airplane engines. Such linear cloud formations only sometimes arise from temperature and pressure disturbances of the passing engines, rather than any deliberate release, but are highly visible in the right conditions under flightpaths, and may have the appearance of "spraying" action. {{w|Nucleation#Examples of the nucleation of fluids (gases and liquids)|Vapor nucleation}} is central to both cloud seeding and contrails. People sometimes attempt chemical manipulation of unwitting people in small areas (such as scent-based marketing, commercial space scent utilization, or wearing scented products.[https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/3469-smells-shoppers-spend-more.html]) There is very little evidence that sophisticated mind control posited by chemtrail conspiracists is possible, even after extensive research.[https://www.google.com/books/edition/Poisoner_in_Chief/U6iDDwAAQBAJ]

[[Ponytail]] is an entomologist, studying chemically mediated cooperative ant navigation. [[Cueball]] knows she will be annoyed when he tells her, "So, I hear you're really into chemtrails?" Indeed, he gets the reaction he hoped for when she objects strongly and rejects this with a loud, "'''No!!'''" The choice of terminology is often a sore spot for those who study a particular field in depth, for example entomological discussions of "slave-making" in socially parasitic species.[https://evolve.community.uaf.edu/2015/04/23/emantcipation-when-captured-ants-rise-against-their-captors/] [[Randall]] writes in the caption that such misuse is how to annoy people like Ponytail.

The title text humorously contrasts individual ants instinctively deciding how the whole colony behaves by using chemicals to indicate routes to food or dangers to motivate the colony to react to their individual experiences, with the human fear of loss of personal independence by being regulated by otherwise disconnected ruling elites, as depicted in the ant/technology interaction speculative fiction-themed [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fISvc-yUU1A "Infrared"] music video by the alt-rock band ''Placebo''.

Ants are a recurring theme, as are those who study them. See for instance [[638: The Search]] which specifically deals with ants' pheromone trails or [[1610: Fire Ants]]. Chemtrails were also the subject of [[966: Jet Fuel]], [[1677: Contrails]], and were mentioned in [[1803: Location Reviews]]. This comic has a similar format to [[2036: Edgelord]]: a simple one-panel interaction consisting of a (likely deliberate) misuse of a term in regards to a professional's work, followed immediately by the professional's upset outburst, and Randall's caption spelling out "How to annoy" the professional. Both seem related to Randall's [[:Category:My Hobby|hobbies]], as he seems to think a lot about how to annoy specific groups of people, perhaps in an attempt to minimize annoyances.

==Transcript==

:[Cueball stands talking to Ponytail, who has her arms raised and has small lines above her head to indicate annoyance.]
:Cueball: So, I hear you're really into chemtrails?
:Ponytail: '''''No!!'''''

:[Caption below the panel:]
:How to annoy entomologists who study ant navigation

==Trivia==
*Whether ant gland secretion signalling is {{w|Turing completeness|Turing-equivalent}} is explored in Douglas Hofstadter's ''{{w|Gödel, Escher, Bach|Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid}}''.
*Ponytail may conceivably be a professional entomologist who once worked with an editor who inserted the word "chemtrails" in one of her [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00359-019-01363-z comparative physiology] or [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10071-020-01354-7 ''Animal Cognition''] drafts competing before a peer review panel with papers by [https://bio.kuleuven.be/ento/pdfs/billen_procnev_2006_signal_variety.pdf Johan Bilen] of the Leuven University Zoological Institute and Harvard's [https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674045880 Rüdiger Wehner].

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Puns]]
[[Category:Conspiracy theory]]
[[Category:Aviation]]

2676: Historical Dates

2022-09-24T08:07:14Z

172.70.206.163: typo

{{comic
| number = 2676
| date = September 23, 2022
| title = Historical Dates
| image = historical_dates_2x.png
| imagesize = 305x438px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Evidence suggests the 1899 transactions occurred as part of a global event centered around a deity associated with the lotus flower.
}}

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

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

Historical records show millions of business transactions occurred on dec 30th, 1899.

This economic activity sparked the digital age, culminating in a "data festival" on jan 1st, 1970, when many early digital files were created.

It's going to be weird when historians forget why some dates show up a lot.

{{comic discussion}}

2675: Pilot Priority List

2022-09-24T07:45:53Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ unnecessary

{{comic
| number = 2675
| date = September 21, 2022
| title = Pilot Priority List
| image = pilot_priority_list_2x.png
| imagesize = 369x548px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = CELEBRATE: Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by using an ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, CITATE AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The [https://elevate-aviation.com/blog/pilots-priority-checklist "ANC" Pilot Priority Checklist] is a list of three guidelines, sorted by priority, that pilots should follow to prevent them from being distracted. Failing to follow it might make the plane crash or suffer other problems. As a {{w|mnemonic}} device, all the activities end in ''-ate''.

# '''Aviate''' means keeping the plane in control. If the pilot fails to do this the plane might crash. That is why this should be the highest priority for the pilot.
# '''Navigate''' means knowing where you are and where you're going. Failing to follow this might make the plane go into restricted airspace, for example, or make the journey take too long, or cause the flight to crash into terrain obscured by clouds.
# '''Communicate''' means talking with air traffic control (ATC) and your company's people through the radio. In the standard list, this is the lowest priority because talking through the radio might distract the pilot from other more important or urgent tasks, and purely corporate communications are to be avoided during critical flight phases.

By deferring less important activities until the prior need is deemed satisfied, the immediate dangers of flight into terrain ({{w|United Airlines Flight 173|UFIT}} and {{w|Controlled flight into terrain|CFIT}}) are reduced (as the pilot's {{w|Loss of control (aeronautics)|current circumstances}} allow) and yet leave time to be able to coordinate properly with any {{w|Separation (aeronautics)|other hazards}}.

[[Randall]] humorously "extends" this standard list with other ''-ate'' checklist items that pilots could do if they're not too busy aviating, navigating and communicating. These extra tasks go from somewhat hilarious to physically impossible or dangerous; see the [[#Table of extended priority items|table]] below for explanations. These actions {{w|Sterile flight deck rule|should generally not be taken}}, as they could distract the pilot and prevent them from reaching the cabin in case of an emergency, or simply vaporize everyone inside — including the plane itself.

[[File:Airspace classes (United States).png|thumb|Airspace classes in the United States]]

The title text adds another ''-ate'' item to the checklist: Celebrate. It refers to airspace with stricter entry requirements overhead of large airports. In the US, the {{w|Airspace_class_(United_States)|airspace class}} over airports starts with a small circle over the airport and then becomes wider in one or two steps at higher altitudes. When depicted graphically, this looks like an {{w|File:Airspace classes (United States).png|inverted tiered cake}}, as opposed to a [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ regular tiered cake]. Randall suggests that after having congratulated yourself for flying a plane, you could then celebrate by serving the passengers cakes in this inverted shape. It would, however, be unsuitable for a plane to serve cakes that are smaller at the bottom than at the top because of turbulence.

{{clear}}

===Table of extended priority items===
{| class="wikitable"
! Checklist item
! Description
! Explanation
|-
| Decorate || Make the cockpit fancy || {{w|Interior design}} of aircraft cockpits is usually starkly utilitarian and could conceivably benefit from enhancements if they aren't distracting. See for example [https://futurism.com/boeings-spaceship-cockpit-looks-strikingly-different-spacexs this comparison of SpaceX and Boeing space capsule cockpits.]
|-
| Accelerate || See how fast you can go || While pilots are often keenly interested in the extents of their aircraft flight capabilities, maximum speed is inefficient in jet aircraft, and probably best explored during testing rather than passenger flights.
|-
| Roller skate || Zoom down the aisle || Passengers would probably not appreciate this,{{cn}} although fellow crew members might be amused. Or possibly the other way around.
|-
| Exfoliate || Scrub away dead skin || {{w|Emery board}}s and {{w|pumice}} are used to prevent flaking and the development of {{w|callus}}es but dermatologists caution exfoliation is very often unnecessary and can have unwanted consequences.
|-
| Sublimate || Turn directly into a vapor || To the contrary, one of the most important duties of aircraft pilots is to prevent passengers and crew from vaporizing.[citation: rules 1 and 2 are nearly impossible to do when in gaseous form and yes we do need a citation for this citation]
|-
| Pollinate || Fly low to stir up pollen || Low-flying helicopters can assist in plant {{w|pollination}},[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S037842901931175X] and are offered as a [http://www.flyingmair.com/ag-services/corn-pollination/ commercial service by helicopter pilots.]
|-
| Congratulate || You're doing a good job flying a plane! || Self-esteem is an important component of mental health, and affirmations can help build it.{{cn}}
|-
| Celebrate (title text) || Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram || See discussion of the title text above.
|}

==Transcript==
:[A list with ten numbered points are shown. Above the list is a large header. Below this is a divided line with a section header written in a smaller than standard font. The three first numbered points are below this. Then follows another divided line with section header written in smaller font and below this the next seven numbered points. All ten points have two lines of text. A line with a normal sized font and below each of these a description in a smaller light gray font.]
::<big>Pilot Priority List</big>
:-----------Standard section-----------
:1. Aviate
::Maintain control of the aircraft
:2. Navigate
::Figure out where you're going
:3. Communicate
::Stay in touch with ATC and others
:-----------Extended section-----------
:4. Decorate
::Make the cockpit fancy
:5. Accelerate
::See how fast you can go
:6. Roller skate
::Zoom down the aisle
:7. Exfoliate
::Scrub away dead skin
:8. Sublimate
::Turn directly to a vapor
:9. Pollinate
::Fly low to stir up pollen
:10. Congratulate
::You're doing a good job flying a plane!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Food]]

2675: Pilot Priority List

2022-09-24T07:45:19Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ tighten

{{comic
| number = 2675
| date = September 21, 2022
| title = Pilot Priority List
| image = pilot_priority_list_2x.png
| imagesize = 369x548px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = CELEBRATE: Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by using an ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, CITATE AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The [https://elevate-aviation.com/blog/pilots-priority-checklist "ANC" Pilot Priority Checklist] is a list of three guidelines, sorted by priority, that pilots should follow to prevent them from being distracted. Failing to follow it might make the plane crash or suffer other problems. As a {{w|mnemonic}} device, all the activities end in ''-ate''.

# '''Aviate''' means keeping the plane in control. If the pilot fails to do this the plane might crash. That is why this should be the highest priority for the pilot.
# '''Navigate''' means knowing where you are and where you're going. Failing to follow this might make the plane go into restricted airspace, for example, or make the journey take too long, or cause the flight to crash into terrain obscured by clouds.
# '''Communicate''' means talking with air traffic control (ATC) and your company's people through the radio. In the standard list, this is the lowest priority because talking through the radio might distract the pilot from other more important or urgent tasks, and purely corporate communications are to be avoided during critical flight phases.

By deferring less important activities until the prior need is deemed satisfied, the immediate dangers of flight into terrain ({{w|United Airlines Flight 173|UFIT}} and {{w|Controlled flight into terrain|CFIT}}) are reduced (insofar as the pilot's {{w|Loss of control (aeronautics)|current circumstances}} allow) and yet leave time to be able to coordinate properly with any {{w|Separation (aeronautics)|other hazards}}.

[[Randall]] humorously "extends" this standard list with other ''-ate'' checklist items that pilots could do if they're not too busy aviating, navigating and communicating. These extra tasks go from somewhat hilarious to physically impossible or dangerous; see the [[#Table of extended priority items|table]] below for explanations. These actions {{w|Sterile flight deck rule|should generally not be taken}}, as they could distract the pilot and prevent them from reaching the cabin in case of an emergency, or simply vaporize everyone inside — including the plane itself.

[[File:Airspace classes (United States).png|thumb|Airspace classes in the United States]]

The title text adds another ''-ate'' item to the checklist: Celebrate. It refers to airspace with stricter entry requirements overhead of large airports. In the US, the {{w|Airspace_class_(United_States)|airspace class}} over airports starts with a small circle over the airport and then becomes wider in one or two steps at higher altitudes. When depicted graphically, this looks like an {{w|File:Airspace classes (United States).png|inverted tiered cake}}, as opposed to a [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ regular tiered cake]. Randall suggests that after having congratulated yourself for flying a plane, you could then celebrate by serving the passengers cakes in this inverted shape. It would, however, be unsuitable for a plane to serve cakes that are smaller at the bottom than at the top because of turbulence.

{{clear}}

===Table of extended priority items===
{| class="wikitable"
! Checklist item
! Description
! Explanation
|-
| Decorate || Make the cockpit fancy || {{w|Interior design}} of aircraft cockpits is usually starkly utilitarian and could conceivably benefit from enhancements if they aren't distracting. See for example [https://futurism.com/boeings-spaceship-cockpit-looks-strikingly-different-spacexs this comparison of SpaceX and Boeing space capsule cockpits.]
|-
| Accelerate || See how fast you can go || While pilots are often keenly interested in the extents of their aircraft flight capabilities, maximum speed is inefficient in jet aircraft, and probably best explored during testing rather than passenger flights.
|-
| Roller skate || Zoom down the aisle || Passengers would probably not appreciate this,{{cn}} although fellow crew members might be amused. Or possibly the other way around.
|-
| Exfoliate || Scrub away dead skin || {{w|Emery board}}s and {{w|pumice}} are used to prevent flaking and the development of {{w|callus}}es but dermatologists caution exfoliation is very often unnecessary and can have unwanted consequences.
|-
| Sublimate || Turn directly into a vapor || To the contrary, one of the most important duties of aircraft pilots is to prevent passengers and crew from vaporizing.[citation: rules 1 and 2 are nearly impossible to do when in gaseous form and yes we do need a citation for this citation]
|-
| Pollinate || Fly low to stir up pollen || Low-flying helicopters can assist in plant {{w|pollination}},[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S037842901931175X] and are offered as a [http://www.flyingmair.com/ag-services/corn-pollination/ commercial service by helicopter pilots.]
|-
| Congratulate || You're doing a good job flying a plane! || Self-esteem is an important component of mental health, and affirmations can help build it.{{cn}}
|-
| Celebrate (title text) || Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram || See discussion of the title text above.
|}

==Transcript==
:[A list with ten numbered points are shown. Above the list is a large header. Below this is a divided line with a section header written in a smaller than standard font. The three first numbered points are below this. Then follows another divided line with section header written in smaller font and below this the next seven numbered points. All ten points have two lines of text. A line with a normal sized font and below each of these a description in a smaller light gray font.]
::<big>Pilot Priority List</big>
:-----------Standard section-----------
:1. Aviate
::Maintain control of the aircraft
:2. Navigate
::Figure out where you're going
:3. Communicate
::Stay in touch with ATC and others
:-----------Extended section-----------
:4. Decorate
::Make the cockpit fancy
:5. Accelerate
::See how fast you can go
:6. Roller skate
::Zoom down the aisle
:7. Exfoliate
::Scrub away dead skin
:8. Sublimate
::Turn directly to a vapor
:9. Pollinate
::Fly low to stir up pollen
:10. Congratulate
::You're doing a good job flying a plane!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Food]]

2675: Pilot Priority List

2022-09-24T07:44:41Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ grammar

{{comic
| number = 2675
| date = September 21, 2022
| title = Pilot Priority List
| image = pilot_priority_list_2x.png
| imagesize = 369x548px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = CELEBRATE: Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by using an ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, CITATE AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The [https://elevate-aviation.com/blog/pilots-priority-checklist "ANC" Pilot Priority Checklist] is a list of three guidelines, sorted by priority, that pilots should follow to prevent them from being distracted. Failing to follow it might make the plane crash or suffer other problems. As a {{w|mnemonic}} device, all the activities end in ''-ate''.

# '''Aviate''' means keeping the plane in control. If the pilot fails to do this the plane might crash. That is why this should be the highest priority for the pilot.
# '''Navigate''' means knowing where you are and where you're going. Failing to follow this might make the plane go into restricted airspace, for example, or make the journey take too long, or cause the flight to crash into terrain obscured by clouds.
# '''Communicate''' means talking with air traffic control (ATC) and your company's people through the radio. In the standard list, this is the lowest priority because talking through the radio might distract the pilot from other more important or urgent tasks, and purely corporate communications are to be avoided during critical flight phases.

By deferring less important activities until the prior need is deemed satisfied, the immediate dangers of flight into terrain ({{w|United Airlines Flight 173|UFIT}} and {{w|Controlled flight into terrain|CFIT}}) are proportionately reduced (insofar as the pilot's {{w|Loss of control (aeronautics)|current circumstances}} allow) and yet leave time to be able to coordinate properly with any {{w|Separation (aeronautics)|other hazards}}.

[[Randall]] humorously "extends" this standard list with other ''-ate'' checklist items that pilots could do if they're not too busy aviating, navigating and communicating. These extra tasks go from somewhat hilarious to physically impossible or dangerous; see the [[#Table of extended priority items|table]] below for explanations. These actions {{w|Sterile flight deck rule|should generally not be taken}}, as they could distract the pilot and prevent them from reaching the cabin in case of an emergency, or simply vaporize everyone inside — including the plane itself.

[[File:Airspace classes (United States).png|thumb|Airspace classes in the United States]]

The title text adds another ''-ate'' item to the checklist: Celebrate. It refers to airspace with stricter entry requirements overhead of large airports. In the US, the {{w|Airspace_class_(United_States)|airspace class}} over airports starts with a small circle over the airport and then becomes wider in one or two steps at higher altitudes. When depicted graphically, this looks like an {{w|File:Airspace classes (United States).png|inverted tiered cake}}, as opposed to a [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ regular tiered cake]. Randall suggests that after having congratulated yourself for flying a plane, you could then celebrate by serving the passengers cakes in this inverted shape. It would, however, be unsuitable for a plane to serve cakes that are smaller at the bottom than at the top because of turbulence.

{{clear}}

===Table of extended priority items===
{| class="wikitable"
! Checklist item
! Description
! Explanation
|-
| Decorate || Make the cockpit fancy || {{w|Interior design}} of aircraft cockpits is usually starkly utilitarian and could conceivably benefit from enhancements if they aren't distracting. See for example [https://futurism.com/boeings-spaceship-cockpit-looks-strikingly-different-spacexs this comparison of SpaceX and Boeing space capsule cockpits.]
|-
| Accelerate || See how fast you can go || While pilots are often keenly interested in the extents of their aircraft flight capabilities, maximum speed is inefficient in jet aircraft, and probably best explored during testing rather than passenger flights.
|-
| Roller skate || Zoom down the aisle || Passengers would probably not appreciate this,{{cn}} although fellow crew members might be amused. Or possibly the other way around.
|-
| Exfoliate || Scrub away dead skin || {{w|Emery board}}s and {{w|pumice}} are used to prevent flaking and the development of {{w|callus}}es but dermatologists caution exfoliation is very often unnecessary and can have unwanted consequences.
|-
| Sublimate || Turn directly into a vapor || To the contrary, one of the most important duties of aircraft pilots is to prevent passengers and crew from vaporizing.[citation: rules 1 and 2 are nearly impossible to do when in gaseous form and yes we do need a citation for this citation]
|-
| Pollinate || Fly low to stir up pollen || Low-flying helicopters can assist in plant {{w|pollination}},[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S037842901931175X] and are offered as a [http://www.flyingmair.com/ag-services/corn-pollination/ commercial service by helicopter pilots.]
|-
| Congratulate || You're doing a good job flying a plane! || Self-esteem is an important component of mental health, and affirmations can help build it.{{cn}}
|-
| Celebrate (title text) || Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram || See discussion of the title text above.
|}

==Transcript==
:[A list with ten numbered points are shown. Above the list is a large header. Below this is a divided line with a section header written in a smaller than standard font. The three first numbered points are below this. Then follows another divided line with section header written in smaller font and below this the next seven numbered points. All ten points have two lines of text. A line with a normal sized font and below each of these a description in a smaller light gray font.]
::<big>Pilot Priority List</big>
:-----------Standard section-----------
:1. Aviate
::Maintain control of the aircraft
:2. Navigate
::Figure out where you're going
:3. Communicate
::Stay in touch with ATC and others
:-----------Extended section-----------
:4. Decorate
::Make the cockpit fancy
:5. Accelerate
::See how fast you can go
:6. Roller skate
::Zoom down the aisle
:7. Exfoliate
::Scrub away dead skin
:8. Sublimate
::Turn directly to a vapor
:9. Pollinate
::Fly low to stir up pollen
:10. Congratulate
::You're doing a good job flying a plane!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Food]]

2675: Pilot Priority List

2022-09-24T07:43:57Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ explanation

{{comic
| number = 2675
| date = September 21, 2022
| title = Pilot Priority List
| image = pilot_priority_list_2x.png
| imagesize = 369x548px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = CELEBRATE: Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by using an ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, CITATE AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The [https://elevate-aviation.com/blog/pilots-priority-checklist "ANC" Pilot Priority Checklist] is a list of three guidelines, sorted by priority, that pilots should follow to prevent them from being distracted. Failing to follow it might make the plane crash or suffer other problems. As a {{w|mnemonic}} device, all the activities end in ''-ate''.

# '''Aviate''' means keeping the plane in control. If the pilot fails to do this the plane might crash. That is why this should be the highest priority for the pilot.
# '''Navigate''' means knowing where you are and where you're going. Failing to follow this might make the plane go into restricted airspace, for example, or make the journey take too long, or cause the flight to crash into terrain obscured by clouds.
# '''Communicate''' means talking with air traffic control (ATC) and your company's people through the radio. In the standard list, this is the lowest priority because talking through the radio might distract the pilot from other more important or urgent tasks, and purely corporate communications are to be avoided during critical flight phases.

By deferring less important activities until the prior need is deemed satisfied, the immediate dangers of flight into terrain ({{w|United Airlines Flight 173|UFIT}} and {{w|Controlled flight into terrain|CFIT}}) are proportionately reduced (insofar as any pilot's {{w|Loss of control (aeronautics)|current circumstances}} allow) and yet leave time to be able to coordinate properly with any {{w|Separation (aeronautics)|other hazards}}.

[[Randall]] humorously "extends" this standard list with other ''-ate'' checklist items that pilots could do if they're not too busy aviating, navigating and communicating. These extra tasks go from somewhat hilarious to physically impossible or dangerous; see the [[#Table of extended priority items|table]] below for explanations. These actions {{w|Sterile flight deck rule|should generally not be taken}}, as they could distract the pilot and prevent them from reaching the cabin in case of an emergency, or simply vaporize everyone inside — including the plane itself.

[[File:Airspace classes (United States).png|thumb|Airspace classes in the United States]]

The title text adds another ''-ate'' item to the checklist: Celebrate. It refers to airspace with stricter entry requirements overhead of large airports. In the US, the {{w|Airspace_class_(United_States)|airspace class}} over airports starts with a small circle over the airport and then becomes wider in one or two steps at higher altitudes. When depicted graphically, this looks like an {{w|File:Airspace classes (United States).png|inverted tiered cake}}, as opposed to a [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ regular tiered cake]. Randall suggests that after having congratulated yourself for flying a plane, you could then celebrate by serving the passengers cakes in this inverted shape. It would, however, be unsuitable for a plane to serve cakes that are smaller at the bottom than at the top because of turbulence.

{{clear}}

===Table of extended priority items===
{| class="wikitable"
! Checklist item
! Description
! Explanation
|-
| Decorate || Make the cockpit fancy || {{w|Interior design}} of aircraft cockpits is usually starkly utilitarian and could conceivably benefit from enhancements if they aren't distracting. See for example [https://futurism.com/boeings-spaceship-cockpit-looks-strikingly-different-spacexs this comparison of SpaceX and Boeing space capsule cockpits.]
|-
| Accelerate || See how fast you can go || While pilots are often keenly interested in the extents of their aircraft flight capabilities, maximum speed is inefficient in jet aircraft, and probably best explored during testing rather than passenger flights.
|-
| Roller skate || Zoom down the aisle || Passengers would probably not appreciate this,{{cn}} although fellow crew members might be amused. Or possibly the other way around.
|-
| Exfoliate || Scrub away dead skin || {{w|Emery board}}s and {{w|pumice}} are used to prevent flaking and the development of {{w|callus}}es but dermatologists caution exfoliation is very often unnecessary and can have unwanted consequences.
|-
| Sublimate || Turn directly into a vapor || To the contrary, one of the most important duties of aircraft pilots is to prevent passengers and crew from vaporizing.[citation: rules 1 and 2 are nearly impossible to do when in gaseous form and yes we do need a citation for this citation]
|-
| Pollinate || Fly low to stir up pollen || Low-flying helicopters can assist in plant {{w|pollination}},[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S037842901931175X] and are offered as a [http://www.flyingmair.com/ag-services/corn-pollination/ commercial service by helicopter pilots.]
|-
| Congratulate || You're doing a good job flying a plane! || Self-esteem is an important component of mental health, and affirmations can help build it.{{cn}}
|-
| Celebrate (title text) || Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram || See discussion of the title text above.
|}

==Transcript==
:[A list with ten numbered points are shown. Above the list is a large header. Below this is a divided line with a section header written in a smaller than standard font. The three first numbered points are below this. Then follows another divided line with section header written in smaller font and below this the next seven numbered points. All ten points have two lines of text. A line with a normal sized font and below each of these a description in a smaller light gray font.]
::<big>Pilot Priority List</big>
:-----------Standard section-----------
:1. Aviate
::Maintain control of the aircraft
:2. Navigate
::Figure out where you're going
:3. Communicate
::Stay in touch with ATC and others
:-----------Extended section-----------
:4. Decorate
::Make the cockpit fancy
:5. Accelerate
::See how fast you can go
:6. Roller skate
::Zoom down the aisle
:7. Exfoliate
::Scrub away dead skin
:8. Sublimate
::Turn directly to a vapor
:9. Pollinate
::Fly low to stir up pollen
:10. Congratulate
::You're doing a good job flying a plane!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Food]]

2675: Pilot Priority List

2022-09-23T02:29:11Z

172.70.206.163: /* Table of extended priority items */ term

{{comic
| number = 2675
| date = September 21, 2022
| title = Pilot Priority List
| image = pilot_priority_list_2x.png
| imagesize = 369x548px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = CELEBRATE: Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an ELUCIDATE, EXPLICATE, ANNOTATE, DEMONSTRATE, AND ILLUSTRATE CHECKLIST. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The [https://elevate-aviation.com/blog/pilots-priority-checklist "ANC" Pilot Priority Checklist] is a list of three guidelines, sorted by priority, that pilots should follow to prevent them from being distracted. Failing to follow it might make the plane crash or suffer other problems. As a {{w|mnemonic}} device, all the activities end in ''-ate''.

# '''Aviate''' means "Keeping the plane in control". If the pilot fails to do this the plane might crash. That is why this should be the highest priority for the pilot.
# '''Navigate''' means "Knowing where you are and where you're going". Failing to follow this might make the plane go into restricted airspace, for example, or make the journey take too long, or cause the flight to crash into terrain obscured by clouds.
# '''Communicate''' means talking with air traffic control (ATC) and your company's people through the radio. In the standard list, this is the lowest priority because talking through the radio might distract the pilot from other more important or urgent tasks, and purely corporate communications are to be avoided during critical flight phases.

By deferring all activities until the prior need is deemed satisfied, the immediate dangers of flight into terrain ({{w|United Airlines Flight 173|UFIT}} and {{w|Controlled flight into terrain|CFIT}}) are proportionately reduced (insofar as any pilot's {{w|Loss of control (aeronautics)|current circumstances}} allow) and yet leave time to be able to coordinate properly with any {{w|Separation (aeronautics)|other hazards}}.

[[Randall]] humorously "extends" this standard list with other ''-ate'' checklist items that pilots could do if they're not too busy aviating, navigating and communicating. These extra tasks go from somewhat hilarious to physically impossible or dangerous, see the [[#Table of extended priority items|table]] below for explanations. These actions {{w|Sterile flight deck rule|should generally not be taken}}, as they could distract the pilot and prevent them from reaching the cabin in case of an emergency, or simply vaporize everyone inside — including the plane itself.

The title text adds another ''-ate'' item to the checklist with Celebrate. It refers to airspace with stricter entry requirements overhead of large airports. In the US, the {{w|Airspace_class_(United_States)|airspace class}} over, for instance an airport, starts with a small circle over the airport and then becomes wider in one or two steps at higher altitudes. When depicted graphically, this looks like an {{w|File:Airspace classes (United States).png|inverted tiered cake}}, as opposed to a [https://3brothersbakery.com/product/wedding-white-chandelier-tier/ regular tiered cake]. Randall suggests that after having congratulated yourself for flying a plane, you could then celebrate by serving the passengers cakes in this inverted shape. It would, however, be unsuitable for a plane to serve cakes that are smaller at the bottom than at the top because of turbulence.

===Table of extended priority items===
{| class="wikitable"
! Checklist item
! Description
! Explanation
|-
| Decorate || Make the cockpit fancy || {{w|Interior design}} of aircraft cockpits is usually starkly utilitarian and could conceivably benefit from enhancements if they aren't distracting.
|-
| Accelerate || See how fast you can go || While pilots are often keenly interested in the extents of their aircraft flight capabilities, maximum speed is inefficient in jet aircraft, and probably best explored during testing rather than passenger flights.
|-
| Roller skate || Zoom down the aisle || Passengers would probably not appreciate this,{{cn}} although fellow crew members might be amused.
|-
| Exfoliate || Scrub away dead skin || {{w|Emery board}}s and {{w|pumice}} are used to prevent flaking and the development of {{w|callus}}es but dermatologists caution exfoliation is very often unnecessary and can have unwanted consequences.
|-
| Sublimate || Turn directly into a vapor || To the contrary, one of the most important duties of aircraft pilots is to prevent passengers and crew from vaporizing.
|-
| Pollinate || Fly low to stir up pollen || Low-flying helicopters can assist in plant {{w|pollination}},[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S037842901931175X] and are offered as a [http://www.flyingmair.com/ag-services/corn-pollination/ commercial service by helicopter pilots.]
|-
| Congratulate || You're doing a good job flying a plane! || Self-esteem is an important component of mental health, and affirmations can help build it.{{cn}}
|-
| Celebrate (title text) || Serve passengers tiered cakes shaped like the airspace class diagram || See discussion of the title text above.
|}

==Transcript==
:[A list with ten numbered points are shown. Above the list is a large header. Below this is a divided line with a section header written in a smaller than standard font. The three first numbered points are below this. Then follows another divided line with section header written in smaller font and below this the next seven numbered points. All ten points have two lines of text. A line with a normal sized font and below each of these a description in a smaller light gray font.]
::<big>Pilot Priority List</big>
:-----------Standard section-----------
:1. Aviate
::Maintain control of the aircraft
:2. Navigate
::Figure out where you're going
:3. Communicate
::Stay in touch with ATC and others
:-----------Extended section-----------
:4. Decorate
::Make the cockpit fancy
:5. Accelerate
::See how fast you can go
:6. Roller skate
::Zoom down the aisle
:7. Exfoliate
::Scrub away dead skin
:8. Sublimate
::Turn directly to a vapor
:9. Pollinate
::Fly low to stir up pollen
:10. Congratulate
::You're doing a good job flying a plane!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Food]]

2673: Cursed mRNA Cocktail

2022-09-17T01:41:22Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ specific

{{comic
| number = 2673
| date = September 16, 2022
| title = Cursed mRNA Cocktail
| image = cursed_mrna_cocktail_2x.png
| imagesize = 331x513px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Serve one each to guests whose last cursed cocktail was more than 2 months ago.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a VACCINE DRINKER. Do NOT drink the mRNA Cocktail. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Approximately two dozenth in [[:Category:Comics featuring cursed items|the "cursed" series]], this comic describes a process to approximate the molecular composition of certain {{w|mRNA}}-based vaccines in drinkable form. It contains the variety and relative concentrations of the simple molecular constituents found within the injectable mixture. i.e. mostly water, some sugar, lipids (and an amino acid "or" biological and genetic material.)

Like much of what we eat or drink, the stomach and intestines will neutralise much of the complexity of either the vaccines or this ersatz replica of them, reducing them to simpler proteins of some slight nutritional value. For the vaccine to work, it has been designed to be injected into the body e.g. {{w|intramuscular}}ly to bypass the hostile environment of the human digestive system. While there are similar vaccines administered as a nasal spray, the fragility of mRNA in the human digestive system has curtailed the search for ingestible analogs. [[Randall]]'s replacement mixture '''might provoke generally unwise physiological reactions.''' While very few people would find such a mixture palatable, it is likely nontoxic,{{Actual citation needed}} and contains water, proteins and calories, all important if elementary nutritional components. Because it doesn't contain a complete spectrum of essential amino acids, vitamins, and minerals,{{Actual citation needed}} you can't live on it alone.

The title text suggests the mixture can be served as a "booster" to a prior dose or serving after an initial treatment. There is much study of vaccine efficacy relative to the timing of subsequent doses. Too little time between makes the new dose not necessarily cause the immune system to react in the way that it should; however most pairs of distinct vaccines work well if delivered on the same day.{{Actual citation needed}} The comic recommends not redosing within two months of the last attempt.

The instruction to serve in {{w|shot glasses}} is a play on the actual vaccines being given as a {{w|Injection (medicine)|shot}} (U.K.: {{wiktionary|jab#Noun|jab}}; Scotland: {{wiktionary|jag#Noun|jag}}).

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:Ever wondered what it would be like to drink the new COVID booster?
:This recipe approximately recreates the taste and nutritional profile!
:''(Note: does not protect against COVID.)''

:[The following two testimonies are displayed in spiky bubbles.]
:"...What? Eww." -CDC spokesperson
:"Please stop." -Dr. Anthony Fauci

:Ingredients
:2 cups water
:3 tbsp mayonnaise
:¼ tsp MSG or nutritional yeast
:1 tbsp sugar

:Directions
:Pour 1 cup of water into a blender. Add the mayonnaise and MSG. Blend until smooth.
:Pour the other cup of water into a glass. Add the sugar and 1 tsp of the mixture from the blender. Stir well.
:Serve in shot glasses.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Comics featuring cursed items]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]

2670: Interruption

2022-09-14T23:47:57Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ same sentence

{{comic
| number = 2670
| date = September 9, 2022
| title = Interruption
| image = interruption.png
| titletext = It's been extra bad ever since my GPS got stuck on Phoebe Judge mode.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a GPS VOICE SYNTHESIZER. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is about listening to a {{w|podcast}} while driving with GPS navigation using {{w|speech synthesis}} for {{w|turn-by-turn navigation|turn-by-turn driving instructions}}. {{w|In-car entertainment|Car entertainment systems}} and {{w|Satellite navigation|SatNav}}-enabling devices (if connected to the car's audio feed) typically allow the SatNav to interrupt whatever else is being played, so that directions can be heard clearly. It's usually easy for the driver to recognise such instructions due to the sudden change in characteristics of the voice and the switch in contextual flow. However, if the synthetic voice is similar to the speech that was playing, it may be hard to distinguish between the two, especially if the navigation instructions seem to coincide with the interrupted speech. In cases like this, the listener might think that the driving instructions are part of their podcast.

[[Cueball]] is interviewing [[Ponytail]] for the podcast, and she tells a story about a woman who betrayed her. Just when she is about to tell what the betraying woman said to her before she left with the money, which might have revealed if it has been planned in advance, the GPS instructions interrupts and delivers a driving instruction blocking out the last part of a sentence.

The comic suggests [[Randall]] misinterpreted those driving instructions as part of the story being told in the podcast because the GPS voice sounds similar to Ponytail's voice. The comic illustrates the instructions as if they were part of the story from the podcast. Due to the mysterious nature of the story, it is conceivable that the woman in the podcast could have said the navigation instruction line as part of the podcast, leading to an even more humorous ambiguity between the two. The driving instruction does not really fit into the story.

The title text suggests this confusion worsened after Randall's navigation instructions voice got stuck emulating {{w|Phoebe Judge}}, known for the {{w|Criminal (podcast)|''Criminal''}} and {{w|This Is Love (podcast)|''This Is Love''}} podcasts, implying he often listens to her. The extent to which [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qB2NKadJ6U she may sound similar to voices of common navigation apps] is of course entirely subjective. In Randall's case, however, his GPS actually used Judge's voice for the GPS as well, and thus the potential for confusion is greater.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Ponytail are facing each other from opposite sides of a table. They are sitting in office chairs and are both wearing headsets. They are speaking into microphones standing on the table in front of them.]
:Cueball: ...And that's when you knew she had betrayed you?
:Ponytail: Yeah.
:Ponytail: She picked up the money and walked out.

:[Close-up of Ponytail with the headset on seen from the waist up.]
:Ponytail: To this day, I don't know if she planned it all.
:Ponytail: But there was one moment that makes me think, maybe she did.

:[A frame-less section for Ponytail's voice-over is placed above the next panel. The panel, which is thus half the normal height, is mainly black with a white door opening from which white light is shining on to the floor. A silhouette of a Megan like woman stands in the doorway, holding a bag in one hand. Ponytail tells what she said and that part is written in white on the black part above the woman.]
:Ponytail (voice-over): Just before she disappeared, she paused at the door, looked back at me, and said,
:Ponytail (voice-over for the woman): Hey - if I ever see you again,

:[Close-up of the woman with the bag in silhouette in the white doorway. (Note that from the context of the caption it becomes clear that this was actually said by the GPS navigation system, but at this point of reading, it is taken as Ponytail's voice-over.)]
:Ponytail (voice-over for the woman): Turn left at the next light.

:[Caption below the panels:]
:It's so disorienting when a podcaster has a voice that's similar to my navigation app.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics with inverted brightness]]
[[Category:Maps]]

2671: Rotation

2022-09-14T23:46:38Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ not sure aggregated out is a verb

{{comic
| number = 2671
| date = September 12, 2022
| title = Rotation
| image = rotation.png
| titletext = It's okay, we can just feed the one-pixel image into an AI upscaler and recover the original image, or at least one that's just as cool.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an IMAGE UPSCALER. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Another of [[Randall]]'s [[:Category:Tips|Tips]], this tip claims that rotating a phone and taking a screenshot too many times will cause an image to disappear into nothingness and warns the user against doing so. The camera and the display both have limited resolutions, so the detail of the original screenshot at the center of the image will be reduced as it approaches the range of a few pixels, hence the original image will be lost before it reaches the sub-pixel range. This is funny because the default resolution of contemporary camera phones can be too large to meet size requirements for e.g. mobile phone {{w|Multimedia Messaging Service}}, web file uploads, or email attachments, so one or two steps of this awkward procedure are sometimes necessary.

[[Image:World lines and world sheet.svg|thumb|200px|{{w|String theory}} describes the {{w|worldline}}s of point-like particles as {{w|worldsheet}}s of "closed strings," forming a topological foam.]]

For a fuller explanation of the concepts involved, including {{w|Planck units}}, often associated with the topological {{w|quantum foam}} of {{w|string theory}}, please see [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUF5esTscZI this CGP Grey video.] For an explanation of topological string theory, see [[2658: Coffee Cup Holes]]. Please see also [[1683: Digital Data]] for an analogous image processing concept.

The title text refers to producing photographically likely higher resolution images from lower resolutions, an active area of current research.[https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/ICCV2021/papers/Liang_Hierarchical_Conditional_Flow_A_Unified_Framework_for_Image_Super-Resolution_and_ICCV_2021_paper.pdf] Because reducing the resolution of an image is a lossy process, results obtained through such processes will not be able to perfectly recreate the original. Machine learning can be used to calculate how images of known photographic subjects (or e.g. anime-style art, in the case of {{w|waifu2x}}) behave under certain types of noise or reduction in size, so that images ''of those kinds'' can be upscaled in a way that, if not perfectly recreating the original, at least is a faithful representation, but when the image is scaled all the way down to one pixel, everything except a small amount of data about the image's overall color is lost, making reconstructing the original image impossible. Randall disclaims that, because the AI upscaling is based on ingesting a large corpus of human-made art (with subjects that we find 'interesting' or at least meaningful being predominantly represented), the AI will produce an image that is at least as cool as the original image was. He could also be making a pun on {{w|color temperature}}, which the upscaler will be able to match to the original image. The "[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EnhanceButton enhance button]" for upscaling images is a common trope in movies and television, especially in crime and science fiction stories.

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

:[A phone in portrait orientation shows an image of Cueball standing. It is then rotated, showing the image smaller with bars in landscape orientation, then the next phone is in portrait showing the entire screen of the previous rotated sideways, shrinking it every time. An arrow points from each phone to the phone with the next smaller image, until the last one. The labels, at the 9th, 25th, and 101st rotation, show the decreasing size of the original image as it goes through successive rotations.]

:[Labels:]
:9 rotations: original image is smaller than a pixel.

:25 rotations: original image is smaller than an atom.

:101 rotations: original image is smaller than the Planck length, at which the concept of distance may break down.

:[Bottom caption:]
:Phone tip: don't rotate and screenshot an image too many times or it will become lost in the quantum foam of the universe.

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

2671: Rotation

2022-09-14T23:45:38Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ not absurd

{{comic
| number = 2671
| date = September 12, 2022
| title = Rotation
| image = rotation.png
| titletext = It's okay, we can just feed the one-pixel image into an AI upscaler and recover the original image, or at least one that's just as cool.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an IMAGE UPSCALER. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Another of [[Randall]]'s [[:Category:Tips|Tips]], this tip claims that rotating a phone and taking a screenshot too many times will cause an image to disappear into nothingness and warns the user against doing so. The camera and the display both have limited resolutions, so the detail of the original screenshot at the center of the image will be aggregated out as it approaches the range of a few pixels, hence the original image will be lost before it reaches the sub-pixel range. This is funny because the default resolution of contemporary camera phones can be too large to meet size requirements for e.g. mobile phone {{w|Multimedia Messaging Service}}, web file uploads, or email attachments, so one or two steps of this awkward procedure are sometimes necessary.

[[Image:World lines and world sheet.svg|thumb|200px|{{w|String theory}} describes the {{w|worldline}}s of point-like particles as {{w|worldsheet}}s of "closed strings," forming a topological foam.]]

For a fuller explanation of the concepts involved, including {{w|Planck units}}, often associated with the topological {{w|quantum foam}} of {{w|string theory}}, please see [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUF5esTscZI this CGP Grey video.] For an explanation of topological string theory, see [[2658: Coffee Cup Holes]]. Please see also [[1683: Digital Data]] for an analogous image processing concept.

The title text refers to producing photographically likely higher resolution images from lower resolutions, an active area of current research.[https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/ICCV2021/papers/Liang_Hierarchical_Conditional_Flow_A_Unified_Framework_for_Image_Super-Resolution_and_ICCV_2021_paper.pdf] Because reducing the resolution of an image is a lossy process, results obtained through such processes will not be able to perfectly recreate the original. Machine learning can be used to calculate how images of known photographic subjects (or e.g. anime-style art, in the case of {{w|waifu2x}}) behave under certain types of noise or reduction in size, so that images ''of those kinds'' can be upscaled in a way that, if not perfectly recreating the original, at least is a faithful representation, but when the image is scaled all the way down to one pixel, everything except a small amount of data about the image's overall color is lost, making reconstructing the original image impossible. Randall disclaims that, because the AI upscaling is based on ingesting a large corpus of human-made art (with subjects that we find 'interesting' or at least meaningful being predominantly represented), the AI will produce an image that is at least as cool as the original image was. He could also be making a pun on {{w|color temperature}}, which the upscaler will be able to match to the original image. The "[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EnhanceButton enhance button]" for upscaling images is a common trope in movies and television, especially in crime and science fiction stories.

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

:[A phone in portrait orientation shows an image of Cueball standing. It is then rotated, showing the image smaller with bars in landscape orientation, then the next phone is in portrait showing the entire screen of the previous rotated sideways, shrinking it every time. An arrow points from each phone to the phone with the next smaller image, until the last one. The labels, at the 9th, 25th, and 101st rotation, show the decreasing size of the original image as it goes through successive rotations.]

:[Labels:]
:9 rotations: original image is smaller than a pixel.

:25 rotations: original image is smaller than an atom.

:101 rotations: original image is smaller than the Planck length, at which the concept of distance may break down.

:[Bottom caption:]
:Phone tip: don't rotate and screenshot an image too many times or it will become lost in the quantum foam of the universe.

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

2671: Rotation

2022-09-14T23:44:37Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ too much too fast

{{comic
| number = 2671
| date = September 12, 2022
| title = Rotation
| image = rotation.png
| titletext = It's okay, we can just feed the one-pixel image into an AI upscaler and recover the original image, or at least one that's just as cool.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an IMAGE UPSCALER. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Another of [[Randall]]'s [[:Category:Tips|Tips]], this tip claims that rotating a phone and taking a screenshot too many times will cause an image to disappear into nothingness and warns the user against doing so. This is absurd because the camera and the display both have limited resolutions. The detail of the original screenshot at the center of the image will be aggregated out as it approaches the range of a few pixels, hence the original image will be lost before it reaches the sub-pixel range. This is funny because the default resolution of contemporary camera phones can be too large to meet size requirements for e.g. mobile phone {{w|Multimedia Messaging Service}}, web file uploads, or email attachments, so one or two steps of this awkward procedure are sometimes necessary.

[[Image:World lines and world sheet.svg|thumb|200px|{{w|String theory}} describes the {{w|worldline}}s of point-like particles as {{w|worldsheet}}s of "closed strings," forming a topological foam.]]

For a fuller explanation of the concepts involved, including {{w|Planck units}}, often associated with the topological {{w|quantum foam}} of {{w|string theory}}, please see [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUF5esTscZI this CGP Grey video.] For an explanation of topological string theory, see [[2658: Coffee Cup Holes]]. Please see also [[1683: Digital Data]] for an analogous image processing concept.

The title text refers to producing photographically likely higher resolution images from lower resolutions, an active area of current research.[https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/ICCV2021/papers/Liang_Hierarchical_Conditional_Flow_A_Unified_Framework_for_Image_Super-Resolution_and_ICCV_2021_paper.pdf] Because reducing the resolution of an image is a lossy process, results obtained through such processes will not be able to perfectly recreate the original. Machine learning can be used to calculate how images of known photographic subjects (or e.g. anime-style art, in the case of {{w|waifu2x}}) behave under certain types of noise or reduction in size, so that images ''of those kinds'' can be upscaled in a way that, if not perfectly recreating the original, at least is a faithful representation, but when the image is scaled all the way down to one pixel, everything except a small amount of data about the image's overall color is lost, making reconstructing the original image impossible. Randall disclaims that, because the AI upscaling is based on ingesting a large corpus of human-made art (with subjects that we find 'interesting' or at least meaningful being predominantly represented), the AI will produce an image that is at least as cool as the original image was. He could also be making a pun on {{w|color temperature}}, which the upscaler will be able to match to the original image. The "[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EnhanceButton enhance button]" for upscaling images is a common trope in movies and television, especially in crime and science fiction stories.

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

:[A phone in portrait orientation shows an image of Cueball standing. It is then rotated, showing the image smaller with bars in landscape orientation, then the next phone is in portrait showing the entire screen of the previous rotated sideways, shrinking it every time. An arrow points from each phone to the phone with the next smaller image, until the last one. The labels, at the 9th, 25th, and 101st rotation, show the decreasing size of the original image as it goes through successive rotations.]

:[Labels:]
:9 rotations: original image is smaller than a pixel.

:25 rotations: original image is smaller than an atom.

:101 rotations: original image is smaller than the Planck length, at which the concept of distance may break down.

:[Bottom caption:]
:Phone tip: don't rotate and screenshot an image too many times or it will become lost in the quantum foam of the universe.

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

Talk:2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-09T07:27:00Z

172.70.206.163: Finish

Seems like this could become a series. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.31|172.68.210.31]] 20:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
:Maybe. But I don't think it will be.
:What I was thinking was that there are clearly, on average, around 43  items per 'page', up to this point. This page shows only 19 items (both pre-New and New, or 20 if the "New" line counts as one, don't know if multilines reduce the number of numbered items ler page), so either it's been{{Citation needed}} manually split/new-paged (for changing aesthetics) or else it is highly varying according to the font-height/multiline-wrappings in use beforehand. Or perhaps we should expect around the same number of 'newer New' items to complete this page before the next page number is automatically started to be populated. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.8|172.70.86.8]] 20:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

<nowiki>#156,819</nowiki> looks like a reference to the Phineas and Ferb title sequence, and the episode Oil on Candace and probably more relevant here, What If 84. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.233|108.162.210.233]] 21:49, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
:It's true that it could be a reference, but I think I recognized most of the topics on the list as being mentioned in some what-if article from the archives--in the case of the "painting" one, https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 22:13, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
::I think that given that he learned about this doing his new book that has not been released yet most of the new items would first be clear when we read the book, and hence all references to old what if seems moot to me... In my opinion it seems that those writing the current explanation failed to read this sentence: ''Updates to my "Things You Should Not Do" list, based on what I learned writing What If? 2''!!! Taking this into acount nothing on the new list shoul dbe from the old what if blog/book. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
:I think <nowiki>#156,819</nowiki> is confusing because [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gustave_Guillaumet-_Le_Sahara.jpeg it's been done]. -- [[User:Ken g6|Ken g6]] ([[User talk:Ken g6|talk]]) 17:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Added a transcript, hopefully it isn't too terrible. (also first explainxkcd edit!) [[User:Merrybot|Merrybot]] ([[User talk:Merrybot|talk]]) 21:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Any indication what the purpose of the misspelling of ''hemorrhagic'' as ''*hemorraghic'' might be? XKCD is usually typo-free, which makes this look deliberate – but why? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.3|172.71.94.3]] 00:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
:I assume just a typo by Randall Munroe. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.79|172.70.214.79]] 02:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
::"XKCD is usually typo-free" Oh, they do happen every now and then but usually get corrected eventually by Randall. Nothing too special about this. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

<nowiki>#156,823</nowiki> is actually a subplot in the movie "Only Lovers left Alive" by Jim Jarmusch. {{unsigned ip|162.158.129.163}}

<nowiki>#156,820</nowiki> sounds like a reference to TF2's "Meet the medic" which starts off with The Medic describing how he lost his medical licence by stealing a patient's skeleton {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.103}}

The last item suggests to me that the new book has a question like "What SPF would the sunscreen need to be if you were falling into the sun?" [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:10, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
: Far more than any SPF a terrestrial chemical could attain, which is essentially equivalent to positive infinity in this case, barring any new extremely unlikely physics. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.79|172.70.214.79]] 04:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Is the maximum jail sentence for telling California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs eight or ten years? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.213|172.70.206.213]] 04:06, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
:We need a more practical approach to legal advice. For example, how realistically could there ever be any compensatory damages? If a government regulator ever took a claim that a farm was producing Pokemon eggs seriously, wouldn't their liability for waste, fraud, and abuse damages to the public overwhelm that of the supposed defendant? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 07:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-09T07:26:01Z

172.70.206.163: Reply

Seems like this could become a series. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.31|172.68.210.31]] 20:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
:Maybe. But I don't think it will be.
:What I was thinking was that there are clearly, on average, around 43  items per 'page', up to this point. This page shows only 19 items (both pre-New and New, or 20 if the "New" line counts as one, don't know if multilines reduce the number of numbered items ler page), so either it's been{{Citation needed}} manually split/new-paged (for changing aesthetics) or else it is highly varying according to the font-height/multiline-wrappings in use beforehand. Or perhaps we should expect around the same number of 'newer New' items to complete this page before the next page number is automatically started to be populated. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.8|172.70.86.8]] 20:53, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

<nowiki>#156,819</nowiki> looks like a reference to the Phineas and Ferb title sequence, and the episode Oil on Candace and probably more relevant here, What If 84. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.233|108.162.210.233]] 21:49, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
:It's true that it could be a reference, but I think I recognized most of the topics on the list as being mentioned in some what-if article from the archives--in the case of the "painting" one, https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 22:13, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
::I think that given that he learned about this doing his new book that has not been released yet most of the new items would first be clear when we read the book, and hence all references to old what if seems moot to me... In my opinion it seems that those writing the current explanation failed to read this sentence: ''Updates to my "Things You Should Not Do" list, based on what I learned writing What If? 2''!!! Taking this into acount nothing on the new list shoul dbe from the old what if blog/book. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
:I think <nowiki>#156,819</nowiki> is confusing because [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gustave_Guillaumet-_Le_Sahara.jpeg it's been done]. -- [[User:Ken g6|Ken g6]] ([[User talk:Ken g6|talk]]) 17:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Added a transcript, hopefully it isn't too terrible. (also first explainxkcd edit!) [[User:Merrybot|Merrybot]] ([[User talk:Merrybot|talk]]) 21:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Any indication what the purpose of the misspelling of ''hemorrhagic'' as ''*hemorraghic'' might be? XKCD is usually typo-free, which makes this look deliberate – but why? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.3|172.71.94.3]] 00:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
:I assume just a typo by Randall Munroe. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.79|172.70.214.79]] 02:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
::"XKCD is usually typo-free" Oh, they do happen every now and then but usually get corrected eventually by Randall. Nothing too special about this. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

<nowiki>#156,823</nowiki> is actually a subplot in the movie "Only Lovers left Alive" by Jim Jarmusch. {{unsigned ip|162.158.129.163}}

<nowiki>#156,820</nowiki> sounds like a reference to TF2's "Meet the medic" which starts off with The Medic describing how he lost his medical licence by stealing a patient's skeleton {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.103}}

The last item suggests to me that the new book has a question like "What SPF would the sunscreen need to be if you were falling into the sun?" [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:10, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
: Far more than any SPF a terrestrial chemical could attain, which is essentially equivalent to positive infinity in this case, barring any new extremely unlikely physics. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.79|172.70.214.79]] 04:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Is the maximum jail sentence for telling California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs eight or ten years? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.213|172.70.206.213]] 04:06, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
:We need a more practical approach to legal advice. For example, how realistically could there ever be any compensatory damages? If a government regulator ever took a claim that a farm was producing Pokemon eggs seriously, wouldn't their liability for waste, fraud, and abuse damages overwhelm that of the supposed defendant? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 07:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-09T07:22:58Z

172.70.206.163: Undo revision 294513 by 172.70.211.146 (talk)

{{comic
| number = 2669
| date = September 7, 2022
| title = Things You Should Not Do
| image = things_you_should_not_do.png
| titletext = Now I'm tempted to start telling people that I secretly don't actually know how to do any physics calculations, and so all the answers in What If are based on me actually trying to do the thing and then reporting what happened, but phrased as if it's hypothetical.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SUNSCREEN BALL. Seem people forget that he learned this from writing the new book, thus no reason to assume they reference old stuff, for instance see the update to the peel the planets crust away, that clearly is a reference to a new what if in the book. Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic references various questions submitted to the what if? blog, and is a promotion for [[Randall]]'s new book, ''What if? 2'' (to be released 6 days from the date of this comic publication). This comic has a list of things not to do, an extension of a previous list, and is purportedly things Randall discovered as he was doing research for his book. A visit to the [https://what-if.xkcd.com/archive/ What If? archive] shows the titles, publishing date, and a thumbnail for each article. Many of the acts described under the "new" section of the list are depicted in these thumbnails (see table below); others are references to examples or hypotheticals explored within the articles. Other entries do not seem to reference currently published ''What If?'' content and may therefore be found in the upcoming book, but this cannot be confirmed as of yet.

The title text says that Randall is tempted to tell people that all the things in the book were things that he actually tried to do, not that he calculated the solutions for their problems. Many of the questions and answers in his new book are impossible to attempt in real life.{{citation needed}}

===Table of things you should not do===
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Number !! Entry !! Explanation
|-
! colspan="3" | From existing list
|-
|156,812
|Eat Tide Pods
|{{w|Consumption of Tide Pods|Tide Pod}}s are a brand of laundry detergent sold in small packets ("pods") of water-soluble gel. Many children have tried to eat them, thinking them to be candy, and have had to go to the hospital to treat poisoning. In 2017 and 2018, a satirical "challenge" originated around eating Tide Pods.
|-
|156,813
|Walk on stilts in a thunderstorm
|Taller objects are more likely to be struck by lightning, so walking on stilts outdoors would increase the risk of death by electrocution. It would also presumably risk falling and injuring oneself that way, since the ground becomes wet in a rainstorm.
|-
|156,814
|Set off fireworks at a gas station
|This has the risk of potentially causing an explosion in the gas station, from the sparks of the fireworks.
|-
|156,815
|Feed your cat treats that are the exact shape and texture of a human hand
|This seems to run the risk of the cat attempting to eat your hand, instead of a cat treat.
|-
! colspan="3" | New!
|-
|156,816
|Lean over a geyser vent and try to look down into it
|Geysers shoot steam and hot water upward. If a person were to lean over the geyser and look down during an eruption, they would be struck in the face by this hot liquid and gas mixture and severely injured or killed.
|-
|156,817
|Fly a hot-air balloon over a firing range
|A hot air balloon could present an irresistible target to the people firing their weapons at the range. The balloon could be shot and you could fall to your death. See image on [https://what-if.xkcd.com/81/ this entry].
|-
|156,818
|Peel away the earth's crust
|This is a reference to an entry in the new book, and an image of what it would look like is shown in [[2575: What If? 2]], where a potato peeler is used to remove the crust of the Earth. See also [https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/mercator this comic]. Several *What If* blog posts also result in massive damage to the earth's crust, including what happened to Texas [https://what-if.xkcd.com/153/ here].
|-
|156,819
|Try to paint the Sahara Desert by hand
|This would be [https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/ difficult] and require more paint than humanity has ever produced[https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/].
|-
|156,820
|Remove someone's bones without asking
|Possibly a reference to ''Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'', in which Professor Gilderoy Lockhart removes all the bones of Harry's arm (instead of merely fixing a broken bone).
|-
|156,821
|Spend 100% of your government's budget on mobile game in-app purchases
|A reference to one of the examples listed in [https://what-if.xkcd.com/108/ this post].
|-
|156,822
|Fill a lava lamp with actual lava
|A {{w|lava lamp}} is a glass lamp, which contains a wax mixture inside, and heats so that the wax rises and falls. Putting actual lava inside a regular lava lamp would most likely cause the lamp to melt and the glass to shatter, not to mention handling lava is very dangerous.{{citation needed}} However, in [https://what-if.xkcd.com/122/ this entry], Randall says it would be fairly easy to find a material that would be able to handle the heat of the lava and thus this would be rather anticlimactic.
|-
|156,823
|Drink the blood of someone with a viral hemorraghic (''sic'') fever
|Drinking someone's blood is a bad idea,{{citation needed}} unless you are a vampire. If someone has a {{w|viral hemorrhagic fever}}, it is potentially much worse, as they have a potentially deadly disease, such as Ebola. Drinking blood is the theme of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/98/ this article].
|-
|156,824
|Eat meat from rabid animals
|Eating meat from rabid animals could give you {{w|rabies}}, a virus which is nearly always fatal if not treated prior to the appearance of initial symptoms. Pathogen contamination in cooked foods can persist on the surface of ''e.g.'' tongs, chopsticks, or a fork used to grill, which is why the USDA doesn't allow any kitchen utensils to touch raw or ready to eat foods at all. Exceptions for utensils which touch only raw or partially cooked foods can be negotiated on a case-by-case basis. The rabies virus permeates essentially all nerve tissue before symptoms appear.
|-
|156,825
|Perform your own laser eye surgery
|Refer to the end of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/82/ this article]
|-
|156,826
|Tell California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs
|Issuing false statements to government regulators is a violation of Federal law, for which prison sentences can reach ten years and fines can reach ten thousand dollars plus any compensatory damages. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001 18 U.S. Code § 1001]
|-
|156,827
|Funnel the entire flow of Niagara Falls into the open window of a physics lab
|Likely an oblique reference to the image near the end of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/147/ this article].
|-
|156,828
|Pump ammonia into your abdomen
|{{w|Ammonia}} is an [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPA_list_of_extremely_hazardous_substances extremely hazardous substance] and pumping it into your abdomen would result in a painful death.
|-
|156,829
|Suspend yourself inside a 10-meter ball of sunscreen and fall into the Sun
|Despite its name, sunscreen only protects against some types of radiation from the sun. No amount is going to be adequate protection if you are right inside the sun. Also, sunscreen, being a gel, would evaporate when exposed to vacuum. When exposed to the plasma of the coronal surface or the Sun's interior, it would quickly ionize along with anything inside it, becoming plasma like the rest of the Sun.
|}

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

:[Caption:]
:Updates to my "Things You Should Not Do" list, based on what I learned writing ''What If? 2''
:(out 9/13, xkcd.com/whatif2)

:[The rest of the text appears in a box.]

:<big>Things You Should Not Do</big> 
:(part 3647 of ????)

:[A numbered list, the first four items in a lighter grey]

:<nowiki>#156,812 Eat Tide pods</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,813 Walk on stilts in a thunderstorm</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,814 Set off fireworks at a gas station</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,815 Feed your cat treats that are the exact shape and texture of a human hand</nowiki>

:[A horizontal divider with the text "New!" in the middle in black. The remaining items on the list are also in black.]

:<nowiki>#156,816 Lean over a geyser vent and try to look down into it</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,817 Fly a hot air balloon over a firing range</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,818 Peel away the Earth's crust</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,819 Try to paint the Sahara Desert by hand</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,820 Remove someone's bones without asking</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,821 Spend 100% of your governments budget on mobile game in-app purchases</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,822 Fill a lava lamp with actual lava</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,823 Drink the blood of someone with a viral hemorraghic fever</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,824 Eat meat from rabid animals</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,825 Perform your own laser eye surgery</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,826 Tell California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,827 Funnel the entire flow of Niagara Falls into the open window of a physics lab</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,828 Pump ammonia into your abdomen</nowiki>
:<nowiki>#156,829 Suspend yourself inside a 10-meter ball of sunscreen and fall into the sun</nowiki>

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Book promotion]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Randall Munroe]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Pokémon]]
[[Category:Cats]]

2668: Artemis Quote

2022-09-06T03:11:16Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ paragraph

{{comic
| number = 2668
| date = September 5, 2022
| title = Artemis Quote
| image = artemis_quote.png
| titletext = Another option: "It is an honor to be the first human to set foot on the moon."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|created by a COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Artemis program}} is a series of planned space missions that will land people on the Moon and begin to set up infrastructure for a permanent crewed presence. People first landed on the Moon in 1969 as part of the {{w|Apollo program}}. They have not been back since 1972.

When {{w|Neil Armstrong}} became the first person to walk on the Moon, he famously said, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." However, he was intending to say, "That's one small step for '''''a''''' man, [but] one giant leap for mankind [emphasis added]." [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Frase_de_Neil_Armstrong.ogg The audio recording] omits the word "a", making the sentence confusing, as "man" and "mankind" have the same meaning when referring to all people. The {{w|schwa}} indefinite article "a" is optional in certain contexts of most dialects of American English.[https://linguapress.com/grammar/article-in-english.htm] That it was apparently elided by Armstrong in the excitement, modifying the {{w|semantics}} of the historical phrase, is controversial and thus humorous. Subsequently, Armstrong and others have blamed insufficiently tuned {{w|voice activity detection}} hardware circuitry intended to save power in radio voice transmission, but NASA engineers, third-party historians and their hired experts have never been able to corroborate that explanation.[https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11.step.html][http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003645.html] Armstrong later said he, "would hope that history would grant me leeway for dropping the syllable and understand that it was certainly intended, even if it was not said," and, on p.126 of the June 1982 edition of ''Omni,'' "the 'a' is implied, so I'm happy if they just put it in parentheses."

[[Randall]] suggests that the first Artemis astronaut to set foot on the Moon has a duty to utter an even more confusing quote, saying the sentence, "This is one of my favorite historical quotes — the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the moon," aloud as they step onto the Moon. When quoted by later historians, that would be confusingly self-referential, as if they were alluding to something from the past. This is very unlikely, and funny merely as a recommendation. If it actually happened, it might be both hilarious and scandalous. While the comic's spacecraft has supercicial similarities to the {{w|Starship HLS|current plans}} for the lunar-lander, it is clearly a sufficiently generic craft (and perhaps drawn partly in homage to classic space-fiction) such that Randall does not care to imbue his scene with any of the technical accuracy we have seen him capable of in other depictions of space-hardware.

The title text suggests an alternate phrase by which the Artemis astronaut would say being the first (rather than 13th) person on the Moon is a great honor. People hearing this quote in the future could assume that Artemis was the first crewed mission to the Moon. It could feed into contemporary conspiracy theories that the Apollo landings were faked, furthering the confusion.

This comic coincides with the canceled launch of {{w|Artemis 1}}, an uncrewed test mission which will serve as the start of the Artemis program. The mission was intended to launch on 29 August 2022, and later on 3 September 2022, but was repeatedly postponed due to a series of technical problems and will now take place no earlier than late September 2022.

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

:[The surface of the Moon, with typical craters and rocks across a landscape with a subtle but visibly curved horizon. In the foreground, a vertical rocket standing on four deployed legs. A short ladder, or set of steps, leads down from a hatch in the lower part of the rocket body. The figure of an astronaut is shown having just now stepped forward onto the Moon's surface.]
:Astronaut: This is one of my favorite historical quotes — the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the Moon.

:Caption: Neil Armstrong's "man"/"a man" quote created a lot of historical confusion, and I think it's our duty to expand on that legacy with Artemis.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2668: Artemis Quote

2022-09-06T03:09:23Z

172.70.206.163: reply

The first quote is self-referential (and confuses people, when quoted). The second plays unto the myth that the moon landing was staged. It is nice to be able to choose words, which are cited. A great opportunity to confuse people. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.143|172.68.110.143]] 21:09, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

To those of you wondering [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2668:_Artemis_Quote&diff=294177&oldid=294176 why, "<tt>mankind" ,[emphasis</tt>," currently appears in the wikitext,] I would direct you to [[explain xkcd talk:Editor FAQ#Punctuation inside quotes and parentheses]]. I am discouraged by such pettiness. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.59|172.70.214.59]] 21:26, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:Waitwhat? ...Quote-Space-Comma-OpenBracket..? Good job it isn't like that now, or I'd be rewriting it. (Probably put the <tt>[emphasis added]</tt> within the quotes, for starters, before worrying about the other punctuation.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 23:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps the first Artemis astronaut to set foot on the moon will prefer to come with her own idea of what to say. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.75|172.71.142.75]] 21:55, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:I'm hoping for interpretive dance. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.59|172.70.214.59]] 22:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
::I hope they do a couple cartwheels before saying anything. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 03:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

The quote in the title text is factually true, adding to the confusion it would cause, as it does not actually claim that the Artemis astronaut is the first human to set foot on the Moon, only that it is a great honor to be the first. [[User:Bugstomper|Bugstomper]] ([[User talk:Bugstomper|talk]]) 22:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

It is not [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2668:_Artemis_Quote&diff=prev&oldid=294204 feeding trolls] to acknowledge that these <s>trolls</s> people exist (and are exactly the kind of people Randall [[690: Semicontrolled Demolition|likes to bait]]. But I won't 'unedit' that. (Someone else can either restore it or get rid of the silly compromise of being commented out with a confusingly 'inline' text-comment. Only by checking the precise version dif would it even make much sense.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.141|172.71.178.141]] 22:57, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I interpreted the second (alt text) option as being intended to cause a similar mis-hearing (or suspected mis-hearing) debate as was the case with the original man/a man quote. The word "human" could possibly be mis-heard as "woman" over a poor-quality audio transmission, leading to a debate about which was intended. (According to the comic, the intended word would in fact be "human", but if the person was female most listeners would likely assume that it is supposed to be "woman" as most people are aware that humans have been on the moon before but probably unsure of whether or not a woman has ever been on the moon.)

Questions: Has a woman ever been to the moon, and is NASA planning to choose a woman for the new mission? It wouldn't surprise me if they were planning to send a woman this time around for PC points. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.128|172.70.91.128]] 23:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:Yes, I believe Artemis has announced that they intend to let a woman of color be the 13th on the Moon, but I'm not up to date on the official press releases. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.126|172.70.211.126]] 23:20, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
::I'm Hoping it will be an African-American woman chosen specifically as commander for identity purposes, who says "It's Great to be Black on the Moon!" [Obref Netflix _Space Force_][[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 23:23, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:[Written before two other replies, above, appeared... One maybe answering an issue I raise below about the 'twofer'...] One of the main 'selling points' has been that the {{w|Artemis 3|first landing mission}} would definitely include a female crewmember, and a 'person of colour'. I've never been quite clear that this is to be the two identities of the two crew or if the intention is that there'll be one person fulfilling them both as a "twofer". So those worrying about (or applauding!) "PC points" are already happy to have their fears(/hopes) confirmed.
:As a side note, I find the "PoC" term a horrible phrase, in my mind, but I'm British and I know that whatever problems we have with what terminology to use (BAME, etc) are quite different from the US. And there are near-universally undeniably worse terms to use. And "of colour" (or "color", in Leftpondian) doesn't seem to mean much except not being pure-Saxon. Apparently Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (neé Markle) is mixed-race (some even say "black") but I wouldn't have known (and, now knowing, am not at all bothered by the fact) given that tanning salons output a steady stream of darker-skinned anglo-saxon or even celtic-heritage locals.
:Anyway, there'll be complaints by the anti-PC brigade regardless, not that I mind them being upset. So long as they have good individuals (no Iron Sky 'just send a model', purely as a vanity passenger) they should be able to pick and choose which of various suitable candidates works well in the grand scheme of things.
: (And I don't agree with the "human/woman confusion thing", seems far too clumsy. Even as deliberately awkward phrasing.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.141|172.71.178.141]] 23:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand <tt>because e.g., conflating "a" man with "mankind" is potentially self-contradictory</tt>. There's no conflation in "a man is an individual, but mankind is a group", and the issue is surely more that so seen in "man is an individual, but mankind is a group" where "man"=="mankind" in this respect so that the logic ends up as (A==B)&(A!=B) by trivial analysis... Whatever, I just don't think that explains what is 'wrong'. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.141|172.71.178.141]] 23:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:Addressed in subsequent edits to the Explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.231|172.69.33.231]] 03:04, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

If the astronaut removed his boot before saying "It is an honor to be the first human to set foot on the moon." He/she would technically be correct. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 23:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
: It's a terrible idea to place an unclothed foot on {{w|lunar regolith}}, not only because of the vacuum and temperature, but it's like a layer of somewhat coarsely ground glass reasonably likely to cause puncture or laceration even from the diminished weight of any adult. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.213|172.70.206.213]] 23:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:: I forget where, but I've seen a 'hard'/speculative SF treatment of future Moon tourism options that includes a run out of one handy airlock and almost immediately into another whilst suited and ''singly-''booted (an extremely tight ligature on the other lower leg, for the necessary duration) for those wishing to make their 'ultimate footprint' in the regolith. With a bit of practice beforehand, there is probably a (comparatively) safe hop-step gait that doesn't cause much more damage than the briefly decompressive coldness betwixt the portals connecting to the safer internal environment of the moonbase this all happens at. Still a 'thrill' activity, with inherent risks both in the execution and afterwards. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 23:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:::I have no doubt that someone will leave their actual footprints on the Moon someday, but I hope they use crutches and some way to get their foot back into their pressure suit ASAP. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.49|172.70.210.49]] 02:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Someone ''really'' likes to remove "redundant" words, in edits, amongst other minor adjustments (described similarly laconically) that I'm not sure are truly justified. I bet if I put some of them back (just the ones that I felt served a purpose, and I can imagine the original authors thought so too) they'd just be removed again. And no easy way to argue the toss, so I'll spare you the arguments and put up with the potential travesties. But I get the feeling that there's a particularly opinionated editor out there, active at this very moment, who is more pleased with themself than they rightfully have reason to be. There are valid rhetorical uses for emphasis, you know, and your 'perfection' might not be so universally agreeable despite your sniping. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 00:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
:Is there a Unicode glyph for saying wiki editors need to calm down? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.207.8|172.70.207.8]] 00:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
::There must be one for "copyedit". Which seems to just mean that an edit is being made, without any proper comment. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 00:47, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
::: ⛚✎ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.49|172.70.210.49]] 01:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

2668: Artemis Quote

2022-09-06T03:07:33Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ less repetitive

{{comic
| number = 2668
| date = September 5, 2022
| title = Artemis Quote
| image = artemis_quote.png
| titletext = Another option: "It is an honor to be the first human to set foot on the moon."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|created by a COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Artemis program}} is a series of planned space missions that will land people on the Moon and begin to set up infrastructure for a permanent crewed presence. People first landed on the Moon in 1969 as part of the {{w|Apollo program}}. They have not been back since 1972.

When {{w|Neil Armstrong}} became the first person to walk on the Moon, he famously said, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." However, he was intending to say, "That's one small step for '''''a''''' man, [but] one giant leap for mankind [emphasis added]." [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Frase_de_Neil_Armstrong.ogg The audio recording] omits the word "a", making the sentence confusing, as "man" and "mankind" have the same meaning when referring to all people. The {{w|schwa}} indefinite article "a" is optional in certain contexts of most dialects of American English.[https://linguapress.com/grammar/article-in-english.htm] That it was apparently elided by Armstrong in the excitement, modifying the {{w|semantics}} of the historical phrase, is controversial and thus humorous. Subsequently, Armstrong and others have blamed insufficiently tuned {{w|voice activity detection}} hardware circuitry intended to save power in radio voice transmission, but NASA engineers, third-party historians and their hired experts have never been able to corroborate that explanation.[https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11.step.html][http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003645.html] Armstrong later said he, "would hope that history would grant me leeway for dropping the syllable and understand that it was certainly intended, even if it was not said," and, on p.126 of the June 1982 edition of ''Omni,'' "the 'a' is implied, so I'm happy if they just put it in parentheses."

[[Randall]] suggests that the first Artemis astronaut to set foot on the Moon has a duty to utter an even more confusing quote, saying the sentence, "This is one of my favorite historical quotes — the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the moon," aloud as they step onto the Moon. When quoted by later historians, that would be confusingly self-referential, as if they were alluding to something from the past. This is very unlikely, and funny merely as a recommendation. If it actually happened, it might be both hilarious and scandalous.

The title text suggests an alternate phrase by which the Artemis astronaut would say being the first (rather than 13th) person on the Moon is a great honor. People hearing this quote in the future could assume that Artemis was the first crewed mission to the Moon. It could feed into contemporary conspiracy theories that the Apollo landings were faked, furthering the confusion.

This comic coincides with the canceled launch of {{w|Artemis 1}}, an uncrewed test mission which will serve as the start of the Artemis program. The mission was intended to launch on 29 August 2022, and later on 3 September 2022, but was repeatedly postponed due to a series of technical problems and will now take place no earlier than late September 2022.

While the comic's spacecraft has supercicial similarities to the {{w|Starship HLS|current plans}} for the lunar-lander, it is clearly a sufficiently generic craft (and perhaps drawn partly in homage to classic space-fiction) such that Randall does not care to imbue his scene with any of the technical accuracy we have seen him capable of in other depictions of space-hardware.

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

:[The surface of the Moon, with typical craters and rocks across a landscape with a subtle but visibly curved horizon. In the foreground, a vertical rocket standing on four deployed legs. A short ladder, or set of steps, leads down from a hatch in the lower part of the rocket body. The figure of an astronaut is shown having just now stepped forward onto the Moon's surface.]
:Astronaut: This is one of my favorite historical quotes — the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the Moon.

:Caption: Neil Armstrong's "man"/"a man" quote created a lot of historical confusion, and I think it's our duty to expand on that legacy with Artemis.

{{comic discussion}}

2668: Artemis Quote

2022-09-05T23:04:37Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ agree w/talk

{{comic
| number = 2668
| date = September 5, 2022
| title = Artemis Quote
| image = artemis_quote.png
| titletext = Another option: "It is an honor to be the first human to set foot on the moon."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|created by a WOMAN INHERITS THE EARTH. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Artemis program}} is a series of planned space missions that will land humans on the moon and begin to set up infrastructure for a permanent human presence. Humans first landed on the moon in 1969 as part of the Apollo program. They have not been back since 1972.

When the first human to walk on the moon, {{w|Neil Armstrong}}, took the first step there, he was intending to say, "That's one small step for '''a''' man, but a giant leap for mankind [emphasis added]." The audio recording omits the first instance of the word "a", making the sentence confusing, because ''e.g.,'' conflating "a" man with "mankind" is potentially self-contradictory. This recording was broadcast worldwide at the time and has become a famous historical quote. However, that the {{w|schwa}} grammatical article, "a", optional in certain contexts of most dialects of American English,{{Actual citation needed}} was apparently elided by Armstrong in the excitement, modifying the semantic meaning of the historical phrase, is controversial and therefore funny. Subsequently Armstrong and others have blamed insufficiently tuned {{w|voice activity detection}} hardware circuitry intended to save power in radio voice transmission, but NASA engineers, third-party historians and their hired experts have never been able to corroborate that explanation.

Randall proposes that the first Artemis astronaut should create an even more confusing quote by proposing a sentence that actually appears to be a mere reference to whatever it is they have said. Speaking as if they are alluding to something from the past, it would add contextual confusion to any attempt to directly quote or replay the words from then on. This is very unlikely, and funny merely as a recommendation. If it actually happened, it might be both hilarious and scandalous.

The title text suggests an alternate phrase by which the Artemis astronaut would claim to be the first (rather than 13th) human on the moon. People hearing this quote in the future could assume that Artemis was the first manned mission to the Moon. 

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

:[The surface of the moon, with craters and rocks, and a rocket with a ladder attached and an astronaut stepping onto the moon's surface.]
:Astronaut: This is one of my favorite historical quotes -- the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the moon.

:Caption: Neil Armstrong's "man"/"a man" quote created a lot of historical confusion, and I think it's our duty to expand on that legacy with Artemis.

{{comic discussion}}

2668: Artemis Quote

2022-09-05T23:02:59Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ agreed

{{comic
| number = 2668
| date = September 5, 2022
| title = Artemis Quote
| image = artemis_quote.png
| titletext = Another option: "It is an honor to be the first human to set foot on the moon."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|created by a WOMAN INHERITS THE EARTH. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Artemis program}} is a series of planned space missions that will land humans on the moon and begin to set up infrastructure for a permanent human presence. Humans first landed on the moon in 1969 as part of the Apollo program. They have not been back since 1972.

When the first human to walk on the moon, {{w|Neil Armstrong}}, took the first step there, he was intending to say, "That's one small step for '''a''' man, but a giant leap for mankind" [emphasis added]. The audio recording omits the first instance of the word "a", making the sentence confusing, because ''e.g.,'' conflating "a" man with "mankind" is potentially self-contradictory. This recording was broadcast worldwide at the time and has become a famous historical quote. However, that the {{w|schwa}} grammatical article, "a", optional in certain contexts of most dialects of American English,{{Actual citation needed}} was apparently elided by Armstrong in the excitement, modifying the semantic meaning of the historical phrase, is controversial and therefore funny. Subsequently Armstrong and others have blamed insufficiently tuned {{w|voice activity detection}} hardware circuitry intended to save power in radio voice transmission, but NASA engineers, third-party historians and their hired experts have never been able to corroborate that explanation.

Randall proposes that the first Artemis astronaut should create an even more confusing quote by proposing a sentence that actually appears to be a mere reference to whatever it is they have said. Speaking as if they are alluding to something from the past, it would add contextual confusion to any attempt to directly quote or replay the words from then on. This is very unlikely, and funny merely as a recommendation. If it actually happened, it might be both hilarious and scandalous.

The title text suggests an alternate phrase by which the Artemis astronaut would claim to be the first (rather than 13th) human on the moon. People hearing this quote in the future could assume that Artemis was the first manned mission to the Moon. 

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

:[The surface of the moon, with craters and rocks, and a rocket with a ladder attached and an astronaut stepping onto the moon's surface.]
:Astronaut: This is one of my favorite historical quotes -- the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the moon.

:Caption: Neil Armstrong's "man"/"a man" quote created a lot of historical confusion, and I think it's our duty to expand on that legacy with Artemis.

{{comic discussion}}

2668: Artemis Quote

2022-09-05T22:59:10Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ an incorroboratable excuse isn't an excuse, it's a discredited explanation

{{comic
| number = 2668
| date = September 5, 2022
| title = Artemis Quote
| image = artemis_quote.png
| titletext = Another option: "It is an honor to be the first human to set foot on the moon."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|created by a WOMAN INHERITS THE EARTH. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Artemis program}} is a series of planned space missions that will land humans on the moon and begin to set up infrastructure for a permanent human presence. Humans first landed on the moon in 1969 as part of the Apollo program. They have not been back since 1972.

When the first human to walk on the moon, {{w|Neil Armstrong}}, took the first step there, he was intending to say, "That's one small step for '''a''' man, but a giant leap for mankind" [emphasis added]. The audio recording omits the first instance of the word "a", making the sentence confusing, because ''e.g.,'' conflating "a" man with "mankind" is potentially self-contradictory. This recording was broadcast worldwide at the time and has become a famous historical quote. However, that the {{w|schwa}} grammatical article, "a", optional in certain contexts of most dialects of American English,{{Actual citation needed}} was apparently elided by Armstrong in the excitement, modifying the semantic meaning of the historical phrase, is controversial and therefore funny. Subsequently Armstrong and others have blamed insufficiently tuned {{w|voice activity detection}} hardware circuitry intended to save power in radio voice transmission, but NASA engineers, third-party historians and their hired experts have never been able to corroborate that explanation.

Randall proposes that the first Artemis astronaut should create an even more confusing quote by proposing a sentence that actually appears to be a mere reference to whatever it is they have said. Speaking as if they are alluding to something from the past, it would add contextual confusion to any attempt to directly quote or replay the words from then on. This is very unlikely, and funny merely as a recommendation. If it actually happened, it might be both hilarious and scandalous.

The title text suggests an alternate phrase by which the Artemis astronaut would claim to be the first (rather than 13th) human on the moon. People hearing this quote in the future could assume that Artemis was the first manned mission to the Moon.  It may also have been intended as a phrase Armstrong could have used with less chance of flubbing, but seems inappropriately self-aggrandizing for the mild-mannered astronaut and makes no sense to be declaimed by Artemis's pioneering moonwalker.

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

:[The surface of the moon, with craters and rocks, and a rocket with a ladder attached and an astronaut stepping onto the moon's surface.]
:Astronaut: This is one of my favorite historical quotes -- the first words spoken by an Artemis astronaut on the moon.

:Caption: Neil Armstrong's "man"/"a man" quote created a lot of historical confusion, and I think it's our duty to expand on that legacy with Artemis.

{{comic discussion}}

2667: First Internet Interaction

2022-09-03T22:14:24Z

172.70.206.163: /* Transcript */ replace deleted category on justification stated

{{comic
| number = 2667
| date = September 2, 2022
| title = First Internet Interaction
| image = first_internet_interaction.png
| titletext = To that stranger on the KOOL Tree House chat room, I gotta hand it to you: You were, ultimately, not wrong.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by AN AMERICAN IDIOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic, [[Cueball]], very likely as an autobiographical representation of [[Randall]], describes to [[Megan]] the first time he interacted with a group of people unknown to him over the internet; in an {{w|AOL|AOL}} chat room for children called the "KOOL Tree House chat room" in 1993, when Randall was about nine years old. He read a discussion about {{w|Green Day}}, asked who they are, and was told that not knowing was a serious problem. As Megan says, judging people for lack of pop culture knowledge has remained typical online behavior.

Green Day is an American rock band formed in the East Bay of California in 1987. In 1993, they were still known merely as an independent punk band, and a year away from releasing their major-label debut album ''{{w|Dookie}}'', their first mainstream success. Anyone, especially a nine year-old, not recognizing the band in 1993 would be perfectly normal. After 1993, Green Day would go on to be a widely popular and influential rock band with many acclaimed albums.

This initial online social interaction was a significant formative experience for Cueball, molding his online behavior ever since, in that it still causes him to consider his correspondents' perspectives when communicating. The social dynamics at play are reminiscent of the mathematics of others' perspectives described in [[1053: Ten Thousand]]. Relating the personal experience of an oversized effect from a casual insult is humorous because the extent to which early experiences affect people can be both ironic and profound.

The title text indicates Randall agrees with the reply to the question, suggesting he believes the band is important culturally. Randall probably became a Green Day fan, or at least acquired more than a passing knowledge of their {{w|œuvre}}, recently mentioning their song "{{w|American Idiot (song)|American Idiot}}" in [[2665: America Songs]].

=== Possible subcontext ===
The comic could conceivably humorously compare modern search autocomplete (such as when you type "who is gr" into Google and it gives you suggestions such as "who is grindelwald," "who is grimes," and "who is gru's dad") by comparing it to the slowness of communicating in a chat room using a dial-up modem. A kid in 1993 would probably have a 2400 to 9600 bps modem (14.4 kbps and 19.2 kbps modems were available but expensive). The joke is that [[Cueball]] was slowly typing on a slow modem when another chat room user jumped in and "autocompleted" his question before he could finish it.

This couldn't actually happen, since AOL chat room messages were transmitted in their entirety, rather than a character at a time, but Randall could be taking liberties to make such a joke.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Four panels depicting a conversation between Megan and Cueball]

:[First panel, Megan and Cueball talking]
:Cueball: You know,
:Cueball: I remember the first thing anybody ever said to me on the internet.
:Megan: Yeah?

:[Second panel, part-height to accomodate Cueball's narration above and the memory of a scene below that features 'Young Cueball', with a mop-head of hair, knelt atop a chair to use a computer with CRT and keyboard on the desk, cabled down into a floor-standing minitower case below]
:Cueball (narrative): I was in an AOL Kids chat room in 1993.
:Cueball (narrative): People there kept using a name I didn't recognise.
:Cueball (narrative): After a while I asked what it was.
:Young Cueball (via the use of the keyboard): W... H... O...  I... S...  G... R...

:[Third panel, close-up of Cueball's adult head, continuing the framing conversation]
:Cueball: Someone replied.
:Cueball: "If you don't know who Green Day is, you have a serious problem."
:Cueball: And that was it. My first virtual interaction.

:[Fourth panel, continuing the conversation, Megan and Cueball now seen walking rightwards as they speak]
:Megan: In some ways, the Internet has changed surprisingly little in the last 30 years.
:Cueball: Every time I reply to someone, I think
:Cueball: What if this is their Green Day moment?

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


[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Randall Munroe]]

2667: First Internet Interaction

2022-09-03T21:47:28Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ grammar

{{comic
| number = 2667
| date = September 2, 2022
| title = First Internet Interaction
| image = first_internet_interaction.png
| titletext = To that stranger on the KOOL Tree House chat room, I gotta hand it to you: You were, ultimately, not wrong.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by AN AMERICAN IDIOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic, [[Cueball]], very likely as an autobiographical representation of [[Randall]], describes to [[Megan]] the first time he interacted with a group of people unknown to him over the internet; in an {{w|AOL|AOL}} chat room for children called the "KOOL Tree House chat room" in 1993, when Randall was about nine years old. He read a discussion about {{w|Green Day}}, asked who they are, and was told that not knowing was a serious problem. As Megan says, judging people for lack of pop culture knowledge has remained typical online behavior.

Green Day is an American rock band formed in the East Bay of California in 1987. In 1993, they were still known merely as an independent punk band, and a year away from releasing their major-label debut album ''{{w|Dookie}}'', their first mainstream success. Anyone, especially a nine year-old, not recognizing the band in 1993 would be perfectly normal. After 1993, Green Day would go on to be a widely popular and influential rock band with many acclaimed albums.

This initial online social interaction was a significant formative experience for Cueball, molding his online behavior ever since, in that it still causes him to consider his correspondents' perspectives when communicating. The social dynamics at play are reminiscent of the mathematics of others' perspectives described in [[1053: Ten Thousand]]. Relating the personal experience of an oversized effect from a casual insult is humorous because of the extent to which early experiences affect people can be both ironic and profound.

The title text indicates Randall agrees with the reply to the question, suggesting he believes the band is important culturally. Randall probably subsequently became a Green Day fan, or at least acquired more than a passing knowledge of their {{w|œuvre}}, recently mentioning their song "{{w|American Idiot (song)|American Idiot}}" in [[2665: America Songs]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Four panels depicting a conversation between Megan and Cueball]

:[First panel, Megan and Cueball talking]
:Cueball: You know,
:Cueball: I remember the first thing anybody ever said to me on the internet.
:Megan: Yeah?

:[Second panel, part-height to accomodate Cueball's narration above and the memory of a scene below that features 'Young Cueball', with a mop-head of hair, knelt atop a chair to use a computer with CRT and keyboard on the desk, cabled down into a floor-standing minitower case below]
:Cueball (narrative): I was in an AOL Kids chat room in 1993.
:Cueball (narrative): People there kept using a name I didn't recognise.
:Cueball (narrative): After a while I asked what it was.
:Young Cueball (via the use of the keyboard): W... H... O...  I... S...  G... R...

:[Third panel, close-up of Cueball's adult head, continuing the framing conversation]
:Cueball: Someone replied.
:Cueball: "If you don't know who Green Day is, you have a serious problem."
:Cueball: And that was it. My first virtual interaction.

:[Fourth panel, continuing the conversation, Megan and Cueball now seen walking rightwards as they speak]
:Megan: In some ways, the Internet has changed surprisingly little in the last 30 years.
:Cueball: Every time I reply to someone, I think
:Cueball: What if this is their Green Day moment?

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


[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

explain xkcd talk:Editor FAQ

2022-09-03T21:45:13Z

172.70.206.163: /* Punctuation inside quotes and parentheses */ itals.

Feel free to enter any question about editing this Wiki and don't forget to sign you comment. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:18, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

== Formatting of explanations ==

Many pages contain tables where a definition list would be 1) easier to read 2) mobile friendly, for example: [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1957:_2018_CVE_List&oldid=160469 1957].

I was also involved in rewriting the transcript for [[1963]], where the discussion came up about how those should be styled. ("as if you were reading the comic to someone")

I think we should have a small style guide to encourage sane formatting. What else should such guidelines contain?

Edit: One more thing I'd love to see: semantic headlines (i.e. < h3> headlines for explanation subchapters instead of < h2> which is the same level as the explanation itself)

(Sidenote: I've been active on explainxkcd for quite some time, but only now got around making an account.) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 15:01, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

:Thanks for your remarks. First: There is no need to start every new sentence at a new line. Tables are meant for small content in all other cases it's bad layout. I recently changed this [[2034: Equations]] to a proper floating text. At the transcript tables should never be used, even when there is a table in the comic image it should be described by text. The guide here was mainly written by me because there was nothing like this here before. Some people already helped and I'm happy for any further remarks to enhance it. And this table issue is definitely one; I just not wanted to be the only (arrogant) layout master. Your help is welcome to write something, otherwise I will do so soon.
:For headlines we don't use HTML-code but WIKI-code. The main headlines are written like this: <nowiki>==Explanation==</nowiki>, <nowiki>==Transcript==</nowiki>, and (optional) <nowiki>==Trivia==</nowiki>. Headlines inside that chapters should be done in this way: <nowiki>;Subtitle</nowiki>. The preceding semicolon causes the entire line to be rendered in bold. Only when the explanation really needs sub-chapters it can be done by this: <nowiki>===Sub header===</nowiki> (three equal signs before and after the text). I will put this also into the FAQ.
:Welcome and thanks for helping. PROTIP: Always use the preview button to check the layout before saving. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
::hi, I'm aware about the headlines and stuff, it was just shorter to write it this way in the comment. I see you started a bit with a styleguide already; I hope I can contribute to it next week, when things cool down at work a bit. //gir.st/, who is to lazy to log in [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.190|172.68.51.190]] 06:51, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

So, one more thing, regarding 'What is the proper layout for headers?'. I think we should better use small <code><nowiki>====headings====</nowiki></code> instead of just description titles (<code><nowiki>;bold text</nowiki></code>), since it makes the intent clearer. what is your reasoning behind suggesting it the other way round? greetings, [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 14:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks for your input and of course Wiki markup headers should be valid. I just believe that the simplest way should also be valid for less experienced writers. When a new explanation starts it's often awful and chaotic; giving a simple but effective structure at the beginning helps against this chaos. So, I'm thinking about dividing the section "What is the proper layout for headers?" (it's a question because it's a FAQ) into two subsections:
:*easy: a semicolon, the colon at the following paragraph may be mentioned - but I'm not sure about the colon because it should be ''easy''
:*advanced: <code><nowiki>===headings===</nowiki></code> if the comic really can be divided into chapters; <code><nowiki>====headings====</nowiki></code> as a replacement for the semicolon; and <code><nowiki>==headings==</nowiki></code> is forbidden because it belongs to expl, trnsc, trivia. The semicolon, colon issue should be mentioned here.
:Please consider that there was many chaos in the past and many writers will do their edits without reading this FAQ. So keeping this simple as possible seems to me to be inevitable. And dividing sections by using the semicolon for a header is still much better than many of those tables. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:41, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
::Based on this discussion I edited the current comic here: [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2037%3A_Supreme_Court_Bracket&type=revision&diff=161880&oldid=161841] and compare it to this former version [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2037:_Supreme_Court_Bracket&diff=prev&oldid=161841]. Do not focus on the edits, just scroll down to the resulting page.
::This brought me to another important issue: NO links in a header. At Wikipedia this is also not welcome. This site isn't Wikipedia but in this case I feel this is a good rule. But the TOC (Table of content) is shown in the preview while it's not at the resulting page. The result is preferred but the TOC in the preview may confuse editors here.
::So, I'm still looking for simple instructions, layouts which advanced people always can enhance.
::And consider that some editors are probably younger than xkcd is. Not sure about this but there are definitely young people here and I welcome them all. And I'm NOT getting old like Randall sometimes feel, I like to support every editor despite any other background. And this has to be simple on the first place. STOP(I could talk much more) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Sorry, I missed this. I'd personally go with the "advanced" option, but mentioning both is fine too. Nice work on 2037! Really enjoying our conversations about this, I hope i'm not a bother ;-) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 11:20, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, after a few days and some more edits (for example see here: [[2035: Dark Matter Candidates]]) I believe this would be the best guide:
*<code><nowiki>====headings====</nowiki></code> should be preferred because the advantage is that each header has it's own edit button. One other advantage is that the header text will be shown at the summary in the history.
*The semicolon may be used as a preliminary layout for new comics until it's clear of what content the explanation is composed of.
*On more rare circumstances the <code><nowiki>===headings===</nowiki></code> may divide the explanation into different larger chapters.
*<code><nowiki>==headings==</nowiki></code> is reserved to the general layout and has not to be used.
And I still oppose to the colon at the beginning of any paragraph at all. Any thoughts? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

== Please '''''do not''''' use semicolon-lines as "headings" ==

Hi, sorry to butt in, but I was going to mention this here anyway after I saw it in the FAQ. Please ''don't'' continue to give this advice to editors:
<blockquote>For headlines you have to use Wiki-style code. The simplest way is a preceding semicolon at the beginning of the line which causes the entire line to be rendered in bold.<ref>§ [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ#What_is_the_proper_layout_for_headers.3F|What is the proper layout for headers?]] of the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ|Editor FAQ]]</ref>

====References====
<references/>
</blockquote>

The [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ#In_which_case_tables_are_meaningful_and_when_not.3F|previous Editor FAQ section]] has it right: in wikicode, the semicolon opens a ''description list'', and will be translated into equivalent HTML. In other words, the wikicode is processed as follows:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Wikicode !! HTML
|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" |<pre>; xkcd
: a popular webcomic</pre>
|<pre><dl>
<dt>xkcd</dt>
<dd>a popular webcomic</dd>
</dl></pre>
|}

One or more lines started with a semicolon ''must'' be followed by at least one line that starts with a colon, to provide the <code><dd>...</dd></code> part of the description list block.

It is a {{w|Help:List#Common_mistakes|common mistake}} to use semicolon-lines as "headings". Unfortunately the result is '''invalid HTML''', since the HTML spec requires that a <code><dl></code> block contain:
<blockquote>Zero or more groups each consisting of one or more dt elements followed by one or more dd elements</blockquote>
It's fine to have multiple semicolon-lines in a row (as the HTML standard allows for groups of several <code><dt>...</dt></code> blocks in sequence), but they must '''always''' be followed by at least one <code><dd>...</dd></code> block, created in wikicode by following a line started with a semicolon with another line that starts with a colon.

Just like lines started with <code>*</code> or <code>#</code>, a line started with a <code>;</code> creates a list element, and has syntactic requirements that must be followed. Abusing the description-term wikicode for purposes other than description-list creation not only breaks the HTML on the resulting page, but it makes the content much harder for screen readers and other assistive technologies to parse and accurately reproduce.

(And, yes, technically Mediawiki's use of <code>:</code>-lines for indenting, as on talk pages, is also invalid since it creates a <code><dl><dd>...</dd></dl></code> block with no <code><dt></code> element. So it's bad enough on talk pages, it's 100x worse to encourage doing it on '''article''' pages.) Please consider removing this bad advice from the Editor FAQ. Thanks. -- [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 05:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

:Thanks for your remarks, that's why I started this FAQ and the discussion about it. Especially the header section is still preliminary, just check the section above here at the talk page.
:My first purpose is to keep it as simple as possible for writers having not much or no knowledge about wiki code or HTML. After that an advanced section should follow and define the rules for a complete article.
:Please check my summary from 29 August 2018 just above here. You're right the semicolon isn't a header, that's why I'm saying it should be used only temporary. And after reading your remarks here I would propose a single line with bold text and a following empty line instead of that semicolon thing.
:Keep it simple for people who just want to write something here; advanced users will change it to an appropriate layout later. Consider: When a new comic is out the explanation often starts in chaos. And for now I'm really happy that the overwhelming usage of tables is stopped.
:Let me know what you do think about the bold text line (not by semicolon) and the more sophisticated header guidance for the final layout as I've mentioned on 29 August 2018. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:45, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
::And of course the usage of a semicolon should also be mentioned together with the colon because it's a list. An entire paragraph "How do I format lists?" has still to be written yet. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:51, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
::One more: I've checked the definition for <code>dd/dt/dl</code> and it's clear the <code>dd</code> tag must be followed by at least one (either <code>dt</code> or <code>dl</code>) child. This tells me that the indent done by a colon is proper HTML. This is very important because every transcript since the first comic uses this indentation. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
:::On one hand, yes, the HTML is technically invalid, but on the other hand, every browser gets the intended layout correct, in no small part because these sorts of errors have been parts of industry-wide regression test suites since the mid-1990s. Asking users to try to achieve completely unnecessary perfection is a waste of time. Even screenreaders are completely unfazed by this nominal flaw. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.36|172.70.211.36]] 01:29, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

==Incomplete tags==
The FAQ says to use <code><nowiki>{{incomplete transcript|YOUR REASON}}</nowiki></code> but instead of rendering like this (like with the incomplete template):

{{notice|'''This transcript is incomplete:''' ''YOUR REASON'' If you can address this issue, please '''[{{fullurl:{{{target|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}|action=edit}} edit the page]!''' Thanks.}}

It renders like this:

{{notice|'''This transcript is incomplete.''' Please help [{{fullurl:{{{target|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}|action=edit}} editing] it! Thanks.}}

Can someone please change this? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.180|172.68.133.180]] 02:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
:The FAQ also says: "The reason at the transcript is not shown to the viewer." You can see it when you edit the transcript. And because the reason for the comic is also often not given this should be enough for the transcript. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

== math markup ==

Just to note - I was curious about the "math markup" message at the top of each page, and duly followed the link to the Editor FAQ as instructed, but ther--e is no mention of why it shouldn't be used... (no account yet, as I've not made any edits - yet! and i use google data saver, so this is not my ip -->) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.22|162.158.34.22]] 23:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

:damn, I'm tired - just re-read the section titles, and there it is. It's late, so sorry! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.22|162.158.34.22]] 23:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

::I think the reason given is incomplete, but wanted to check here before I amended it. Transcripts are for the benefit of visually-challenged visitors, so using math markup, and thus rendering the text as images, is counterproductive. Right? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 15:06, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

:::The explanation is (in my opinion) somewhat silly, as the image generated by MathML has an alt tag for text browsers/accessible use. Further, if this wiki's settings were chosen correctly, the image would be output with MathML alongside, which is the ''actual'' (non-plaintext) accessible solution for displaying mathematical formulas on the web. See also: https://accessibility.princeton.edu/about/blog/mathml-accessible-math-markup [[User:DimeCadmium|DimeCadmium]] ([[User talk:DimeCadmium|talk]]) 02:20, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

== Create page for new comic ==

Should there be a paragraph about this?
Since the bot is not working anymore, people need to do this. I know I have seen isntructions somewhere on this wiki, but cannot find them... [btw: there is a new comic up, right now, as I post this line, which is not yet in the wiki. SO if you know how to do it, do it before explaining it on the FAQ :)] --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:27, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

== Page targeted by Spam ==

The page is currently targeted heavily by Spambots. I am not sure why they target this specific page. It might be, because it is linked in the header? Since Admins (who could protect the FAQ) seem to be currently absent from the page, anyone got any ideas what to do about it? leave it to spam and create a seperate FAQ with the same content? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

== Spaces ==

Seriously, why oh why is [[1285:_Third_Way|1285]] not linked into the statement about the one space / two space [[1285:_Third_Way | controversy]]? This feels like an inexplicable gap. Is there a policy insisting the FAQ remain fastidiously humorless in all ways? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.231|162.158.107.231]] 02:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

== Duplicating the hover text/title in the transcript section? ==

Is there a reason not to duplicate the title/hovertext in the transcript section, so a screenreader user can be sent there and not have to page back up for that bit (besides "one or more editors would need to check all entries and edit it in where missing")? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.43|141.101.68.43]] 00:11, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
:For my two (or three) cents:
:1) You'd be duplicating it, so you ought to lose the sub-image record if you do that or you could get silly with all kinds of repeating of everything..
:2) It's a Transcript to try to record/present the text (and imagery) you cannot already screen-read.
:3) It doesn't need manual editing (and manual editing is more likely to have mistakes, anyway).
:...Perhaps some Template(-pair?) could be developed to sit post-template to "display:screenreader-only" (or whatever the markup format would be) the upper-templated titletext field? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 04:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

== it's/its typo ==

At §[[explain_xkcd:Editor_FAQ#How_do_I_enter_mathematical_or_chemical_formulas.3F| How_do_I_enter_mathematical_or_chemical_formulas?]] please change “it's Wikipedia help page” to “'''its''' Wikipedia help page” (for the same reason that "our" and "their" don't have apostrophes).
[[User:Kurahaupo|Kurahaupo]] ([[User talk:Kurahaupo|talk]]) 23:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
: Came here to say this, but I see I'm two months too late. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 12:32, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

== Punctuation inside quotes and parentheses ==

Can we add a section saying <tt>."</tt> or <tt>,"</tt> is always better than putting the quotation mark first, and <tt>.)</tt> or <tt>.")</tt> are similarly preferable to <tt>).</tt> and <tt>").</tt> please? We also need to remind editors that numbered hyperlinks come after periods, commas, and parentheses, not before them. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.83|172.69.33.83]] 03:30, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
:...Erm. For quotes, it depends. If a proper sentence(-fragment) then I'd put punctuation in front (entry and exit), with ','=>'.' or vice-versa, as required by the full container sentence, but retaining notable exclamation- and question-marks. <tt>He said, "Erm," with a hint of hesitation, "For quotes, it depends."</tt> I know this is how I was taught to deal with quoted speech (close on fifty years ago), although I know standards change, and it may not even then have been so necessary for non-speech quotations. Yet certainly if I were to mention a set of randomish words like "Red green blue" (or "Red", "Green" and "Blue", perhaps) I would unhesitatingly consider it utterly wrong to move punctuation within any such quotation section. And note that an Oxford Comma (even without the quotes) would confuse matters in that second example.
:As for <tt>.)</tt> (etc), I've seen somebody ''wrongly'' do this. Do not do it if you have a in-sentence parenthesis (like this). I have never seen any suggestion that you'd do that (like this.) [<= Deliberately wrong!] And, even if it works "like a quote", it ''really'' looks wrong to me. (The clear exception is when you entirely make a sentence parenthetical, like this.)
:Now, this is just my own experience/preference/habituation. I have no doubt there are alternative points of view, which I would welcome to be added hereafter. But, whilst supporting the ''initial'' idea to precede quotes with punctuation (yet content to let it slip when others have prior authorship and it causes no additional confusion), I rail against it as an unwavering/absolutist style for all quotes ("quotes" ''and'' 'quotes', and maybe even «quotes» and the rest?) and especially it having any bearing at all in any bracketting/bracing/parenthesi(s|z)ing situations where full and proper start/end mark nesting should be adhered to as the ''only'' useful criteria.
:An interesting counter-examplee, however, might even mean individualised punctuation either side of a close-paren (if the sentence somehow does not require the same mark as the aside somehow begs, whether that be exclamation, question or even… ellipsis…?!?). Just so. But I'd normally consider rewriting that, as too stream-of-consciousness-like. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.73|162.158.159.73]] 04:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
::This is covered in sections [https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/ch06/ch06_sec005.html 6.5] and [https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/ch06/ch06_sec009.html 6.9] of the ''Chicago Manual of Style''. The intent is to aid readability. The reasons for variation from such style guidelines are evident when they are compelling, but whether a quotation doesn't actually end with a comma is simply not a compelling reason to write typography which distracts the ordinary reader. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.213|172.70.206.213]] 09:32, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
:::(Chicago links need registration to access, so no idea whose arguments/what alternative it supports.)
:::There are many Style Manuals (I'd defer to H. W. Fowler's ''Modern English Usage'', if forced). But, I would say, clarity is king above all. And I think the original suggestion is incorrect in that regard.
:::And depends upon medium. I was taught to put a little finger between words when learning to write with nibbed-pens (and don't smudge/flick the ink!) and a thumb-width indent to each paragraph's first line. Later two spacebars between sentences (and four as indent) when typing.
:::But that's old-hat (and doesn't survive whitespace condensing in XMLish context, etc, anyway). Spell things correctly (or, because of where Randall lives, all Americanised!) and try not to be accidentally ambiguous! And "-1" to original suggestion. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 12:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
::::A Google search on, "Fowler's Modern English on quotation," returns the question, "What is the correct punctuation for quotes?," in the second paragraph of results. Clicking on it shows the answer, "Commas and periods always go inside the quotation marks in American English; dashes, colons, and semicolons almost always go outside the quotation marks; question marks and exclamation marks sometimes go inside, sometimes stay outside."[https://www.grammarly.com/blog/quotation-marks/] Does ''Fowler'' diverge from ''Chicago'' in any of these respects? The paywall has a free 30-day trial, and it isn't difficult to find citations to those sections elsewhere. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 21:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

2667: First Internet Interaction

2022-09-03T21:43:15Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ spurious comma

{{comic
| number = 2667
| date = September 2, 2022
| title = First Internet Interaction
| image = first_internet_interaction.png
| titletext = To that stranger on the KOOL Tree House chat room, I gotta hand it to you: You were, ultimately, not wrong.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by AN AMERICAN IDIOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic, [[Cueball]], very likely as an autobiographical representation of [[Randall]], describes to [[Megan]] the first time he interacted with a group of people unknown to him over the internet; in an {{w|AOL|AOL}} chat room for children called the "KOOL Tree House chat room" in 1993, when Randall was about nine years old. He read a discussion about {{w|Green Day}}, asked who they are, and was told that not knowing was a serious problem. As Megan says, judging people for lack of pop culture knowledge has remained typical online behavior.

Green Day is an American rock band formed in the East Bay of California in 1987. In 1993, they were still known merely as an independent punk band, and a year away from releasing their major-label debut album ''{{w|Dookie}}'', their first mainstream success. Anyone, especially a nine year-old, not recognizing the band in 1993 would be perfectly normal. After 1993, Green Day would go on to be a widely popular and influential rock band with many acclaimed albums.

This initial online social interaction was a significant formative experience for Cueball, molding his online behavior ever since, in that it still causes him to consider his correspondents' perspectives when communicating. The social dynamics at play are reminiscent of the mathematics of others' perspectives described in [[1053: Ten Thousand]]. Relating the personal experience of an oversized effect from a casual insult is humorous because the extent to which early experiences affect people can be both ironic and profound.

The title text indicates Randall agrees with the reply to the question, suggesting he believes the band is important culturally. Randall probably subsequently became a Green Day fan, or at least acquired more than a passing knowledge of their {{w|œuvre}}, recently mentioning their song "{{w|American Idiot (song)|American Idiot}}" in [[2665: America Songs]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Four panels depicting a conversation between Megan and Cueball]

:[First panel, Megan and Cueball talking]
:Cueball: You know,
:Cueball: I remember the first thing anybody ever said to me on the internet.
:Megan: Yeah?

:[Second panel, part-height to accomodate Cueball's narration above and the memory of a scene below that features 'Young Cueball', with a mop-head of hair, knelt atop a chair to use a computer with CRT and keyboard on the desk, cabled down into a floor-standing minitower case below]
:Cueball (narrative): I was in an AOL Kids chat room in 1993.
:Cueball (narrative): People there kept using a name I didn't recognise.
:Cueball (narrative): After a while I asked what it was.
:Young Cueball (via the use of the keyboard): W... H... O...  I... S...  G... R...

:[Third panel, close-up of Cueball's adult head, continuing the framing conversation]
:Cueball: Someone replied.
:Cueball: "If you don't know who Green Day is, you have a serious problem."
:Cueball: And that was it. My first virtual interaction.

:[Fourth panel, continuing the conversation, Megan and Cueball now seen walking rightwards as they speak]
:Megan: In some ways, the Internet has changed surprisingly little in the last 30 years.
:Cueball: Every time I reply to someone, I think
:Cueball: What if this is their Green Day moment?

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


[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]

explain xkcd talk:Editor FAQ

2022-09-03T21:38:24Z

172.70.206.163: /* Punctuation inside quotes and parentheses */ reply

Feel free to enter any question about editing this Wiki and don't forget to sign you comment. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:18, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

== Formatting of explanations ==

Many pages contain tables where a definition list would be 1) easier to read 2) mobile friendly, for example: [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1957:_2018_CVE_List&oldid=160469 1957].

I was also involved in rewriting the transcript for [[1963]], where the discussion came up about how those should be styled. ("as if you were reading the comic to someone")

I think we should have a small style guide to encourage sane formatting. What else should such guidelines contain?

Edit: One more thing I'd love to see: semantic headlines (i.e. < h3> headlines for explanation subchapters instead of < h2> which is the same level as the explanation itself)

(Sidenote: I've been active on explainxkcd for quite some time, but only now got around making an account.) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 15:01, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

:Thanks for your remarks. First: There is no need to start every new sentence at a new line. Tables are meant for small content in all other cases it's bad layout. I recently changed this [[2034: Equations]] to a proper floating text. At the transcript tables should never be used, even when there is a table in the comic image it should be described by text. The guide here was mainly written by me because there was nothing like this here before. Some people already helped and I'm happy for any further remarks to enhance it. And this table issue is definitely one; I just not wanted to be the only (arrogant) layout master. Your help is welcome to write something, otherwise I will do so soon.
:For headlines we don't use HTML-code but WIKI-code. The main headlines are written like this: <nowiki>==Explanation==</nowiki>, <nowiki>==Transcript==</nowiki>, and (optional) <nowiki>==Trivia==</nowiki>. Headlines inside that chapters should be done in this way: <nowiki>;Subtitle</nowiki>. The preceding semicolon causes the entire line to be rendered in bold. Only when the explanation really needs sub-chapters it can be done by this: <nowiki>===Sub header===</nowiki> (three equal signs before and after the text). I will put this also into the FAQ.
:Welcome and thanks for helping. PROTIP: Always use the preview button to check the layout before saving. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
::hi, I'm aware about the headlines and stuff, it was just shorter to write it this way in the comment. I see you started a bit with a styleguide already; I hope I can contribute to it next week, when things cool down at work a bit. //gir.st/, who is to lazy to log in [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.190|172.68.51.190]] 06:51, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

So, one more thing, regarding 'What is the proper layout for headers?'. I think we should better use small <code><nowiki>====headings====</nowiki></code> instead of just description titles (<code><nowiki>;bold text</nowiki></code>), since it makes the intent clearer. what is your reasoning behind suggesting it the other way round? greetings, [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 14:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks for your input and of course Wiki markup headers should be valid. I just believe that the simplest way should also be valid for less experienced writers. When a new explanation starts it's often awful and chaotic; giving a simple but effective structure at the beginning helps against this chaos. So, I'm thinking about dividing the section "What is the proper layout for headers?" (it's a question because it's a FAQ) into two subsections:
:*easy: a semicolon, the colon at the following paragraph may be mentioned - but I'm not sure about the colon because it should be ''easy''
:*advanced: <code><nowiki>===headings===</nowiki></code> if the comic really can be divided into chapters; <code><nowiki>====headings====</nowiki></code> as a replacement for the semicolon; and <code><nowiki>==headings==</nowiki></code> is forbidden because it belongs to expl, trnsc, trivia. The semicolon, colon issue should be mentioned here.
:Please consider that there was many chaos in the past and many writers will do their edits without reading this FAQ. So keeping this simple as possible seems to me to be inevitable. And dividing sections by using the semicolon for a header is still much better than many of those tables. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:41, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
::Based on this discussion I edited the current comic here: [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2037%3A_Supreme_Court_Bracket&type=revision&diff=161880&oldid=161841] and compare it to this former version [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2037:_Supreme_Court_Bracket&diff=prev&oldid=161841]. Do not focus on the edits, just scroll down to the resulting page.
::This brought me to another important issue: NO links in a header. At Wikipedia this is also not welcome. This site isn't Wikipedia but in this case I feel this is a good rule. But the TOC (Table of content) is shown in the preview while it's not at the resulting page. The result is preferred but the TOC in the preview may confuse editors here.
::So, I'm still looking for simple instructions, layouts which advanced people always can enhance.
::And consider that some editors are probably younger than xkcd is. Not sure about this but there are definitely young people here and I welcome them all. And I'm NOT getting old like Randall sometimes feel, I like to support every editor despite any other background. And this has to be simple on the first place. STOP(I could talk much more) --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
:::Sorry, I missed this. I'd personally go with the "advanced" option, but mentioning both is fine too. Nice work on 2037! Really enjoying our conversations about this, I hope i'm not a bother ;-) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 11:20, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, after a few days and some more edits (for example see here: [[2035: Dark Matter Candidates]]) I believe this would be the best guide:
*<code><nowiki>====headings====</nowiki></code> should be preferred because the advantage is that each header has it's own edit button. One other advantage is that the header text will be shown at the summary in the history.
*The semicolon may be used as a preliminary layout for new comics until it's clear of what content the explanation is composed of.
*On more rare circumstances the <code><nowiki>===headings===</nowiki></code> may divide the explanation into different larger chapters.
*<code><nowiki>==headings==</nowiki></code> is reserved to the general layout and has not to be used.
And I still oppose to the colon at the beginning of any paragraph at all. Any thoughts? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

== Please '''''do not''''' use semicolon-lines as "headings" ==

Hi, sorry to butt in, but I was going to mention this here anyway after I saw it in the FAQ. Please ''don't'' continue to give this advice to editors:
<blockquote>For headlines you have to use Wiki-style code. The simplest way is a preceding semicolon at the beginning of the line which causes the entire line to be rendered in bold.<ref>§ [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ#What_is_the_proper_layout_for_headers.3F|What is the proper layout for headers?]] of the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ|Editor FAQ]]</ref>

====References====
<references/>
</blockquote>

The [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ#In_which_case_tables_are_meaningful_and_when_not.3F|previous Editor FAQ section]] has it right: in wikicode, the semicolon opens a ''description list'', and will be translated into equivalent HTML. In other words, the wikicode is processed as follows:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Wikicode !! HTML
|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" |<pre>; xkcd
: a popular webcomic</pre>
|<pre><dl>
<dt>xkcd</dt>
<dd>a popular webcomic</dd>
</dl></pre>
|}

One or more lines started with a semicolon ''must'' be followed by at least one line that starts with a colon, to provide the <code><dd>...</dd></code> part of the description list block.

It is a {{w|Help:List#Common_mistakes|common mistake}} to use semicolon-lines as "headings". Unfortunately the result is '''invalid HTML''', since the HTML spec requires that a <code><dl></code> block contain:
<blockquote>Zero or more groups each consisting of one or more dt elements followed by one or more dd elements</blockquote>
It's fine to have multiple semicolon-lines in a row (as the HTML standard allows for groups of several <code><dt>...</dt></code> blocks in sequence), but they must '''always''' be followed by at least one <code><dd>...</dd></code> block, created in wikicode by following a line started with a semicolon with another line that starts with a colon.

Just like lines started with <code>*</code> or <code>#</code>, a line started with a <code>;</code> creates a list element, and has syntactic requirements that must be followed. Abusing the description-term wikicode for purposes other than description-list creation not only breaks the HTML on the resulting page, but it makes the content much harder for screen readers and other assistive technologies to parse and accurately reproduce.

(And, yes, technically Mediawiki's use of <code>:</code>-lines for indenting, as on talk pages, is also invalid since it creates a <code><dl><dd>...</dd></dl></code> block with no <code><dt></code> element. So it's bad enough on talk pages, it's 100x worse to encourage doing it on '''article''' pages.) Please consider removing this bad advice from the Editor FAQ. Thanks. -- [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 05:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

:Thanks for your remarks, that's why I started this FAQ and the discussion about it. Especially the header section is still preliminary, just check the section above here at the talk page.
:My first purpose is to keep it as simple as possible for writers having not much or no knowledge about wiki code or HTML. After that an advanced section should follow and define the rules for a complete article.
:Please check my summary from 29 August 2018 just above here. You're right the semicolon isn't a header, that's why I'm saying it should be used only temporary. And after reading your remarks here I would propose a single line with bold text and a following empty line instead of that semicolon thing.
:Keep it simple for people who just want to write something here; advanced users will change it to an appropriate layout later. Consider: When a new comic is out the explanation often starts in chaos. And for now I'm really happy that the overwhelming usage of tables is stopped.
:Let me know what you do think about the bold text line (not by semicolon) and the more sophisticated header guidance for the final layout as I've mentioned on 29 August 2018. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:45, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
::And of course the usage of a semicolon should also be mentioned together with the colon because it's a list. An entire paragraph "How do I format lists?" has still to be written yet. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:51, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
::One more: I've checked the definition for <code>dd/dt/dl</code> and it's clear the <code>dd</code> tag must be followed by at least one (either <code>dt</code> or <code>dl</code>) child. This tells me that the indent done by a colon is proper HTML. This is very important because every transcript since the first comic uses this indentation. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
:::On one hand, yes, the HTML is technically invalid, but on the other hand, every browser gets the intended layout correct, in no small part because these sorts of errors have been parts of industry-wide regression test suites since the mid-1990s. Asking users to try to achieve completely unnecessary perfection is a waste of time. Even screenreaders are completely unfazed by this nominal flaw. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.36|172.70.211.36]] 01:29, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

==Incomplete tags==
The FAQ says to use <code><nowiki>{{incomplete transcript|YOUR REASON}}</nowiki></code> but instead of rendering like this (like with the incomplete template):

{{notice|'''This transcript is incomplete:''' ''YOUR REASON'' If you can address this issue, please '''[{{fullurl:{{{target|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}|action=edit}} edit the page]!''' Thanks.}}

It renders like this:

{{notice|'''This transcript is incomplete.''' Please help [{{fullurl:{{{target|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}}|action=edit}} editing] it! Thanks.}}

Can someone please change this? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.180|172.68.133.180]] 02:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
:The FAQ also says: "The reason at the transcript is not shown to the viewer." You can see it when you edit the transcript. And because the reason for the comic is also often not given this should be enough for the transcript. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

== math markup ==

Just to note - I was curious about the "math markup" message at the top of each page, and duly followed the link to the Editor FAQ as instructed, but ther--e is no mention of why it shouldn't be used... (no account yet, as I've not made any edits - yet! and i use google data saver, so this is not my ip -->) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.22|162.158.34.22]] 23:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

:damn, I'm tired - just re-read the section titles, and there it is. It's late, so sorry! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.22|162.158.34.22]] 23:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

::I think the reason given is incomplete, but wanted to check here before I amended it. Transcripts are for the benefit of visually-challenged visitors, so using math markup, and thus rendering the text as images, is counterproductive. Right? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 15:06, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

:::The explanation is (in my opinion) somewhat silly, as the image generated by MathML has an alt tag for text browsers/accessible use. Further, if this wiki's settings were chosen correctly, the image would be output with MathML alongside, which is the ''actual'' (non-plaintext) accessible solution for displaying mathematical formulas on the web. See also: https://accessibility.princeton.edu/about/blog/mathml-accessible-math-markup [[User:DimeCadmium|DimeCadmium]] ([[User talk:DimeCadmium|talk]]) 02:20, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

== Create page for new comic ==

Should there be a paragraph about this?
Since the bot is not working anymore, people need to do this. I know I have seen isntructions somewhere on this wiki, but cannot find them... [btw: there is a new comic up, right now, as I post this line, which is not yet in the wiki. SO if you know how to do it, do it before explaining it on the FAQ :)] --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:27, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

== Page targeted by Spam ==

The page is currently targeted heavily by Spambots. I am not sure why they target this specific page. It might be, because it is linked in the header? Since Admins (who could protect the FAQ) seem to be currently absent from the page, anyone got any ideas what to do about it? leave it to spam and create a seperate FAQ with the same content? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

== Spaces ==

Seriously, why oh why is [[1285:_Third_Way|1285]] not linked into the statement about the one space / two space [[1285:_Third_Way | controversy]]? This feels like an inexplicable gap. Is there a policy insisting the FAQ remain fastidiously humorless in all ways? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.231|162.158.107.231]] 02:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

== Duplicating the hover text/title in the transcript section? ==

Is there a reason not to duplicate the title/hovertext in the transcript section, so a screenreader user can be sent there and not have to page back up for that bit (besides "one or more editors would need to check all entries and edit it in where missing")? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.43|141.101.68.43]] 00:11, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
:For my two (or three) cents:
:1) You'd be duplicating it, so you ought to lose the sub-image record if you do that or you could get silly with all kinds of repeating of everything..
:2) It's a Transcript to try to record/present the text (and imagery) you cannot already screen-read.
:3) It doesn't need manual editing (and manual editing is more likely to have mistakes, anyway).
:...Perhaps some Template(-pair?) could be developed to sit post-template to "display:screenreader-only" (or whatever the markup format would be) the upper-templated titletext field? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 04:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

== it's/its typo ==

At §[[explain_xkcd:Editor_FAQ#How_do_I_enter_mathematical_or_chemical_formulas.3F| How_do_I_enter_mathematical_or_chemical_formulas?]] please change “it's Wikipedia help page” to “'''its''' Wikipedia help page” (for the same reason that "our" and "their" don't have apostrophes).
[[User:Kurahaupo|Kurahaupo]] ([[User talk:Kurahaupo|talk]]) 23:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
: Came here to say this, but I see I'm two months too late. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 12:32, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

== Punctuation inside quotes and parentheses ==

Can we add a section saying <tt>."</tt> or <tt>,"</tt> is always better than putting the quotation mark first, and <tt>.)</tt> or <tt>.")</tt> are similarly preferable to <tt>).</tt> and <tt>").</tt> please? We also need to remind editors that numbered hyperlinks come after periods, commas, and parentheses, not before them. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.83|172.69.33.83]] 03:30, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
:...Erm. For quotes, it depends. If a proper sentence(-fragment) then I'd put punctuation in front (entry and exit), with ','=>'.' or vice-versa, as required by the full container sentence, but retaining notable exclamation- and question-marks. <tt>He said, "Erm," with a hint of hesitation, "For quotes, it depends."</tt> I know this is how I was taught to deal with quoted speech (close on fifty years ago), although I know standards change, and it may not even then have been so necessary for non-speech quotations. Yet certainly if I were to mention a set of randomish words like "Red green blue" (or "Red", "Green" and "Blue", perhaps) I would unhesitatingly consider it utterly wrong to move punctuation within any such quotation section. And note that an Oxford Comma (even without the quotes) would confuse matters in that second example.
:As for <tt>.)</tt> (etc), I've seen somebody ''wrongly'' do this. Do not do it if you have a in-sentence parenthesis (like this). I have never seen any suggestion that you'd do that (like this.) [<= Deliberately wrong!] And, even if it works "like a quote", it ''really'' looks wrong to me. (The clear exception is when you entirely make a sentence parenthetical, like this.)
:Now, this is just my own experience/preference/habituation. I have no doubt there are alternative points of view, which I would welcome to be added hereafter. But, whilst supporting the ''initial'' idea to precede quotes with punctuation (yet content to let it slip when others have prior authorship and it causes no additional confusion), I rail against it as an unwavering/absolutist style for all quotes ("quotes" ''and'' 'quotes', and maybe even «quotes» and the rest?) and especially it having any bearing at all in any bracketting/bracing/parenthesi(s|z)ing situations where full and proper start/end mark nesting should be adhered to as the ''only'' useful criteria.
:An interesting counter-examplee, however, might even mean individualised punctuation either side of a close-paren (if the sentence somehow does not require the same mark as the aside somehow begs, whether that be exclamation, question or even… ellipsis…?!?). Just so. But I'd normally consider rewriting that, as too stream-of-consciousness-like. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.73|162.158.159.73]] 04:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
::This is covered in sections [https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/ch06/ch06_sec005.html 6.5] and [https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/ch06/ch06_sec009.html 6.9] of the ''Chicago Manual of Style''. The intent is to aid readability. The reasons for variation from such style guidelines are evident when they are compelling, but whether a quotation doesn't actually end with a comma is simply not a compelling reason to write typography which distracts the ordinary reader. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.213|172.70.206.213]] 09:32, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
:::(Chicago links need registration to access, so no idea whose arguments/what alternative it supports.)
:::There are many Style Manuals (I'd defer to H. W. Fowler's ''Modern English Usage'', if forced). But, I would say, clarity is king above all. And I think the original suggestion is incorrect in that regard.
:::And depends upon medium. I was taught to put a little finger between words when learning to write with nibbed-pens (and don't smudge/flick the ink!) and a thumb-width indent to each paragraph's first line. Later two spacebars between sentences (and four as indent) when typing.
:::But that's old-hat (and doesn't survive whitespace condensing in XMLish context, etc, anyway). Spell things correctly (or, because of where Randall lives, all Americanised!) and try not to be accidentally ambiguous! And "-1" to original suggestion. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 12:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
::::A Google search on, "Fowler's Modern English on quotation," returns the question, "What is the correct punctuation for quotes?," in the second paragraph of results. Clicking on it shows the answer, "Commas and periods always go inside the quotation marks in American English; dashes, colons, and semicolons almost always go outside the quotation marks; question marks and exclamation marks sometimes go inside, sometimes stay outside."[https://www.grammarly.com/blog/quotation-marks/] Does Fowler diverge from Chicago in any of these respects? The paywall has a free 30-day trial, and it isn't difficult to find citations to those sections elsewhere. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 21:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

2667: First Internet Interaction

2022-09-03T00:42:54Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ deets

2667: First Internet Interaction

2022-09-03T00:40:17Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ giving it a shot for this very different kind of comic

2666: Universe Price Tiers

2022-09-01T04:23:48Z

172.70.206.163: /* Transcript */ cats

{{comic
| number = 2666
| date = August 31, 2022
| title = Universe Price Tiers
| image = universe_price_tiers.png
| titletext = In Universe Pro®™ the laws of physics remain unchanged under time reversal, to maintain backward compatibility.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SOWN WIND - Explained the main point, more details needed. Please change this comment when editing the page . Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Philosophers have posed many questions in trying to understand the nature of the universe. Some of these have become well-known in popular culture; while some are deliberately open-ended, several others are presented as a choice between two or more options, and are assumed to have a single answer, the debate being about which is correct. In this comic, Randall proposes that the answers to these questions are instead not fixed, but vary according to a tiered {{w|subscription business model}}, as seen in many business pricing schemes, particularly in software. In this model, the no-cost tier gets you a universe experience of a lower quality, while at higher tiers better options are available for a cost - for example in the highest tier the processes of aging and death are "Opt-in" rather than "Mandatory". It is not clear from the comic who is supposed to be paying these subscription fees, or whose experience of the universe is supposed to be affected.

The universe does not have a subscription model,{{citation needed}} but on the chart some of the categories that refer to observable properties such as the speed limit or existence of the {{w|Uncertainty Principle}} indicate ours is the Universe Standard® subscription, but other specifications may not entirely match our user experience.

The title text refers to the concept of {{w|T-symmetry}} in physical laws. Most properties of our universe are asymmetric, meaning that the property changes if time is reversed (e.g. the entropy of the universe decreases as time flows backwards). Randall again makes a reference to software subscription models in a play on words as the Universe Pro®™ sub appears to have laws that maintain "backwards compatibility".

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! !! Universe Lite™ !! Universe Standard® !! Universe Pro®™!!Explanation
|-
! Price
| Free || $14.95/month || $49.95/month || Indicative of a typical Freemium product, the versions released include what is effectively an 'unlimited trial' version, but lacking some potentially desired features, and then extra tiers with increased functionality so that you can "get what you pay for".
|-
! Ads
| Yes || Yes || No || There are indeed ads in our own universe, but whether they are an intrinsic property of the universe or not is an open question.
|-
! Number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin
| 4 || 64 || 4,096 || "{{w|How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?}}" is a question used to poke fun at medieval angelology and medieval scholasticism in general by claiming discussions in its fields revolve around meaningless questions. It is also used as a metaphor for wasting time debating useless questions, as it is generally accepted that we can have no definititive answer. Here, the question is given concrete answers that are powers of 2 often seen when using binary representation.
|-
! Free will or determinism
| Determinism || Free will || Free will || Another predominantly philosophical issue, although physics (both Newtonian and Quantum) has not shied away from trying to answer this (see Does God Play Dice? below). It is interesting that the paid versions of the universe are the only ones to include free will, implying that either such a quality is inherently desirable or it is a necessary condition of some other feature in the paid plan (such as, for instance, the aforementioned dice-playing).
|-
! Cosmic speed limit
| 65 mph || 300,000 km/s || Unlimited || The Cosmic speed limit refers to the {{w|speed of light}}, which rounds to 300,000 kilometers per second in our particular universe, one of the few definite clues as to which tier we might exist in. Living in a universe with such a low speed limit would render many aspects of experience unrecognizable from our own; assuming the speed of light and thus all relativistic effects were similarly scaled, the act of driving at highway speeds would result in human-observable time dilation and apparent spatial distortion. The idea of having a speed cap is reminiscent of computer simulations and game engines, which often prevent agents from accelerating beyond a certain point to prevent unintended behavior.
|-
! If a tree falls in a forest and there's no one there to hear...
| No sound || Simple beep || Full sound || {{w|If a tree falls in a forest}} is a popular philosophical question whose answer depends largely on one's philosophical belief system and the interpretation of the question itself. Here it's suggested that there is a definite answer which differs depending on the quality of the universe subscription. On the assumption that "our" universe is on the Standard Plan, this table implies that all trees falling outside of the auditory range of anyone or anything capable of noticing it emit a simplified "beep" sound, rather than the complex crashing one would expect. Given loose enough assumptions, we cannot "prove" in a classical sense that this is not the case, and this may contribute to the humor of this entry.
|-
! Meaning of Life
| Unknowable || Uncertain || Clearly explained || All we can know is that we (currently) don't know, which makes our universe one almost certainly either with an unknowable or uncertain state of affairs.{{Actual citation needed}}
|-
! Sound of one hand clapping
| [None] || [None] || ''Kazzap!'' || A further philosophical question, as the sound of two hands clapping relies upon there being two hands percussing and displacing/resonating air. The "Kazzap" referenced is humorous because it provides an answer to an ill-formed question (what is the sound of one hand clapping?) in the form of a nonsense onomatopoeia. To members of our universe, this is absurd. The implication is that those in the Pro version of the universe have access to this seemingly impossible feat.
|-
! Aging and death
| Mandatory || Mandatory || Opt-in || If this is a mere option, we clearly haven't read (or understood) the online manual or perhaps read the tool-tips.
|-
! Does god play dice with the universe?
| Yes, and he cheats || Yes || No || A reference to a phrase famously ascribed to Einstein (in opposition to the concept of quantum uncertainty) that "God does not play dice with the universe." This option and the Determinism/Free Will choice, above, are interestingly linked but not necessarily in a way we can comprehend.
|-
! Bad things...
| Happen to good people only || Happen to good and bad people || Don't happen || Relates to whether there is justice, compassion or fairness in the universe, or perhaps if there specifically is not. In theological arguments, this detabe is intimately connected with theodicy (the "problem of evil"), but like the existence of free will it is hotly debated in non-theological contexts as well.
|-
! What happens to those who sow the wind
| Reap the whirlwind || Reap the whirlwind || Lots of crops everywhere || 
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! !! Universe Lite™ !! Universe Standard® !! Universe Pro®™
|-
! Price
| Free || $14.95/month || $49.95/month
|-
! Ads
| Yes || Yes || No
|-
! Number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin
| 4 || 64 || 4,096
|-
! Free will or determinism
| Determinism || Free will || Free will
|-
! Cosmic speed limit
| 65mph || 300,000 km/s || Unlimited
|-
! If a tree falls in a forest and there's no one there to hear...
| No sound || Simple beep || Full sound
|-
! Meaning of Life
| Unknowable || Uncertain || Clearly explained
|-
! Sound of one hand clapping
| [None] || [None] || ''Kazzap!''
|-
! Aging and death
| Mandatory || Mandatory || Opt-in
|-
! Does god play dice with the universe?
| Yes, and he cheats || Yes || No
|-
! Bad things...
| Happen to good people only || Happen to good and bad people || Don't happen
|-
! What happens to those who sow the wind
| Reap the whirlwind || Reap the whirlwind || Lots of crops everywhere
|}
{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Philosophy]]
[[Category: Religion]]

2661: Age Milestone Privileges

2022-08-30T00:46:25Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ complete table

{{comic
| number = 2661
| date = August 19, 2022
| title = Age Milestone Privileges
| image = age_milestone_privileges.png
| titletext = If you reach 122, you get complete unrevertible editorial control over Jeanne Calment's Wikipedia article.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BABY GOD-EMPRESS MAKING THE PRESIDENT'S LETTER R-RATED - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This is a list of "age milestones" in the United States. As usual for Randall, he has added many fictional entries to supplement some real life ones. The real milestones are the ages at which Americans are generally allowed to do certain things for the first time. These are a mix of legal restrictions (such as the age for driving and voting), rules from private companies (such as movie theaters and car rental companies) and medical guidance (like the shingles vaccine).

{| class="wikitable"
! Age || Privilege || Real? || Description
|-
| 16 || Drive || Yes || Legal driving age in the US is set by the individual states, but the general rule is that Americans are allowed to begin driving on public roads at age 16. There are various levels of restrictions on this privilege, however. In Randall's state of {{w|Driver's licenses in the United States#Licenses for adults and minors; GDL laws|Massachusetts, and in 8 other states}}, 16 is the minimum age to apply for a learner's permit. {{w|Driver's licenses in the United States#/media/File:Restricted license age requirements by US state.svg|In most of the country, 16 years is the minimum age for a restricted driver's license.}}
|-
| 17 || Attend R-Rated movies alone || Yes || In the US, the Motion Picture Association assigns {{w|Motion_Picture_Association_film_rating_system|ratings}} to movies based on whether they consider the film's content to be suitable for children. In this classification, "R" stands for "restricted", and the guidance from the MPAA is that no one under the age of 17 should be allowed to see it if not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. It should be noted that this guidance does not have force of law, but is sufficiently accepted that nearly all US theaters adopt it as a policy.
|-
| 18 || Vote || Yes || The Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents a minimum age of voting from being set above eighteen, meaning that eighteen-year-olds are old enough to legally vote anywhere in the country. Some states allow 17-year-olds to vote in primaries if they will turn 18 before the general election, but Randall's state of Massachusetts is not one of them.
|-
| 21 || Buy alcohol || Yes || While individual states have official power over the drinking age, the {{w|National Minimum Drinking Age Act}} restricts federal funding from states that do not enforce a drinking age of 21 years. This has resulted in a ''de facto'' national drinking age of 21 in the US, which is higher than most countries. It should be noted that some states allow minors to drink alcohol under certain circumstances, but no state allows anyone under 21 to buy alcohol.
|-
| 25 || Rent a car || Generally || Car rental companies set their own age restrictions on renting cars. The industry standard in the US is to charge a higher rate for drivers under the age of 25. Thus, there was not a "prohibition" per se, but 25 is a milestone for "regular" rates and fees on car rentals.
|-
| 30 || Run for Senate || Almost || This entry is slightly incorrect: According to {{w|Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause 3: Qualifications of senators|Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution}}, one must be at least 30 years old in order to ''become'' Senator, not ''run'' for Senate. For example, Joe Biden was 29 years old when he was first elected to Senate but turned 30 before being sworn in.
|-
| 32 || Rent a Senator's car || No || This is the first joke entry in the table. For one thing, most Senators do not rent out their cars, which they probably need to use regularly themselves because they have jobs{{Citation needed}} to commute to, and it would be a security hazard to allow random strangers access to their vehicle.

This could also be a reference to the Ambassador, a now defunct car brand.
|-
| 35 || Run for president || Almost || In the United States, according to {{w|Article Two of the United States Constitution#Clause 5: Qualifications for office|Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution}}, a person must be at least 35 years old to be eligible to hold the Office of President. Similar to the age 30 entry, this is slightly incorrect. However, unlike the Senate case, this technicality has not been relevant for anyone elected as United States president—at least not yet (as of 2022).
|-
| 40 || Rent a flying car || No || A 25-year-old might be able to rent a non-flying car today, but not a flying car, because the technology is not mature enough to the point where they're available to rent. The joke is that by the time a 25-year-old reader becomes 40, the technology will exist and they'll be able to rent a flying car. Unlike the earlier lines, the limitation has nothing to do with their age, just technological development.
Alternatively, even once flying cars are developed, their usage will be more restricted. For example, young people are perceived to be more reckless and/or otherwise dangerous.

This whole issue may be virtually negated if the newly developed flying cars are introduced only as ''self-''flying cars (an off-shoot of self-driving technology but devoid of many of the dangers of navigating roads, i.e. person-controlled vehicles, pedestrians and other ground-based hazards), in which case the age (or even presence) of the renter may be very much more irrelevant than the nature of any route/destination the guidance computer is tasked to fulfill. The question would then be how much a potential passenger would trust pure electronics to avoid all the actual dangers for what is essentially a flying taxi, compared to a human controller who may be fallible but presumably at least has their own fully developed common sense and a degree of self-preservation as well as any requisite training.
|-
| 45 || Learn about the God-Empress || No || Obviously, the God-Empress does not actually exist because this comic is visible to people under 45 years old.{{Citation needed}} According to [[1413]], she will be public knowledge by 2040 anyway.
|-
| 50 || Join AARP || Yes || Full {{w|AARP}} (formerly called the American Association of Retired Persons) membership is available to anyone age 50 and over. Officially, there are no age restrictions to membership, but members under the age of 50 do not have access to full benefits.
|-
| 50 || Get a shingles vaccine || Recommendation || At the time of the comic, the [https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/shingles/public/shingrix/index.html CDC recommended] that adults 50 years and older get the shingles vaccine called Shingrix (this line was not in the original version of the comic, corrected later)
|-
| 52 || Click to skip captchas || No || Older people might have more difficulty understanding [[:Category:CAPTCHA|captchas]]. Also, they could be more inconvenienced because some older people move more slowly, so it would take them longer to move the mouse, and people would care more about older people anyway. However, this would be impractical to implement because if the computer knew the person's age, it would know that the user is a person, not a bot, so there would be no point in a captcha anyway.
|-
| 55 || Vote for God-Empress || No || It appears that a person must have knowledge of the existence of the God-Empress for ten years before they are sufficiently qualified to elect a new one. Since the God-Empress is (presumably) in power for life, it is likely that most people would have to wait much longer than ten years.
|-
| 62 || $80 national parks lifetime pass || Yes || The US National Parks Service has a [https://www.nps.gov/planyourvisit/passes.htm lifetime membership pass] for Americans ages 62 and over, which allows access to national parks and other areas managed by the NPS.
|-
| 65 || Eligible for Medicare || Yes || {{w|Medicare (United States)|Medicare}} is a US government-run health insurance for older people, and indeed begins eligibility at age 65 for the general public.
|-
| 67 || Collect Social Security || Yes || {{w|Social Security (United States)|Social Security}} is a system of benefits for retired individuals, disabled persons and widows/widowers. U.S. individuals may collect reduced Social Security benefits starting at age 62, and they can collect increased Social Security benefits if they wait until age 70. 67 is considered "Full Retirement Age." There is some debate about whether one would be better off waiting or taking it right away, but for most people Full Retirement Age (67) is at least close to optimal.
|-
| 68 || See "Skip ads" button on live TV|| No || Some DVRs and streaming applications have a feature to skip over commercial breaks in recorded programs, but this could not be available in live TV, since it would require jumping forward in time. Time travel is currently impossible.{{citation needed}}
|-
| 70 || Run for God-Empress || No || The name suggests that this would also only be available to women.
|-
| 75 || Ride any animal in a national park || No || The National Parks Service probably could institute this relatively safely because most people over 75 would not be able to run fast enough to outrun/catch up to an animal and mount it{{Citation needed}} and would not have the rebellious/risk-taking/adventurous streak that would incline them to try.{{Citation needed}}
|-
| 80 || Eligible for Megacare || No || This is based on becoming eligible for Medicare at age 65.
|-
| 85 || Click to toggle whether an ad is positive or negative about the product || No || In line with previous milestones regarding advertisements, this implies the ability to control reality and change the mood of the ad one is watching as it is running. Obviously, this is impossible, but could potentially be pulled off by adding an option to change the ad to another ad about the same product, but with the opposite viewpoint of the product. Ignoring the issue that ads that are just negative about a specific target don't tend to be commissioned. Except perhaps in certain areas of political campaigning. Furthermore, the wording appears to imply the new ad is the same as the one you were watching previously, ie. same actors, rather than a different ad about the same product.
|-
| 90 || Click to make any movie R-rated || No || It is unclear whether this would actually make the movie less appropriate or change the Motion Picture Association's rating to be erroneous. Also, what if the rating was previously NC-17?
|-
| 100 || Get a letter from the president || No || In the US (which other milestones, such as running for president starting at age 35, indicate is the country being referred to), you can instead get [https://www.today.com/series/today-celebrates/celebrate-today-ask-al-roker-wish-your-loved-ones-happy-t69606 congratulated] by the weatherman ({{w|Al Roker}}) on the {{w|Today (American TV program)|Today Show}}. However, the United Kingdom is much closer. People there can [https://www.royal.uk/anniversary-messages-0 apply to receive a card] (formerly a telegram, later a TeleMessage) from the Queen on their 100th birthday.
|-
| 102 || (35+67) Collect a presidential pension || No || The idea behind this joke is that it is the minimum age of presidency plus the minimal age to collect Social Security. There are several reasons why this must be a joke. Two are that Social Security begins 67 years after the person was born, not 67 years after the person's job started, and that the United States government would not bother to set up such a system because the vast majority of people, including former presidents, do not live to 102 years old. In fact, as of 2022, no former United States president has ever lived to 102 years old. The current oldest former U.S. President is Jimmy Carter at 97. Good luck Jimmy, only 5 more years!
|-
| 105 || Get a birthday card from the God-Empress || No || Being a God-Empress would be more important than being the leader of a single country. This would make the God-Empress's time more valuable, so she only has to send a birthday card to the few people who reach the age of 105. Contrariwise, the God-Empress is presumptively all-powerful and furthermore capable of delegation of ministerial tasks such as card transmission, so the utilitarian fact that the scarcity of 105-year-old people reduces workload is not a plausible justification.
|-
| 111 || Leave your own birthday party early by putting on a magic ring || No || This is a reference to the Lord of the Rings where Bilbo leaves his eleventy-first birthday party (the Bilbo Baggins Farewell Birthday Party) invisibly by using The One Ring.
|-
| 118 || Vote 100 times || No || Presumably a joke meaning the person can now cast 100 votes, for each election issue that a younger person can only vote for once, giving their opinion a vastly increased personal weight (or subtlety, if they vote more across the board than merely grant 100 votes to the same outcome), although it may not greatly change the result unless sufficient voters exist (of a like mind) to disproportionately swing the result towards the result desired more by these elder voters than their one-vote juniors.
It is the 100th anniversary of their having (potentially) first voted, and as such is a century milestone. But if there were exactly one election at the same time each year, the first vote on or after their birthday would actually be the 101st vote the person has been eligible to cast in their lifetime. If the sole election of each year were held at a different time of each year, someone who voted in every election might vote for the 100th time at either age 116, 117, or 118. However this milestone would happen earlier because there are often multiple elections per year, e.g., primaries, general elections and possibly runoffs. There may also be several reasons why the person may not have been given the opportunity to vote every year since they were 18, e.g. prior to the {{w|Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|women's suffrage}} being officially ratified barely 100 years ago, but most importantly that the mandated minimum voting age was 21 until {{w|Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|much more recently}}.
|-
| 120 || Collect the pensions of all elected officials || No || It is very unlikely that any government would award the pensions of all elected officials to anyone because they have reached the age of 120 years.{{cn}}
|-
| 125 || Drink alcohol in an R-rated movie while getting a shingles vaccine from the president || No || This entry references four earlier milestones (attending an R-rated movie, drinking alcohol, becoming President, and getting the shingles vaccine) whose corresponding ages (17, 21, 35, and 50) sum to 123. While not exactly 125, this may have contributed to the inspiration or age selection of this milestone.
|-
| 128 || Age rolls over, become a baby again || No{{Citation needed}} || {{w|Integer overflow}} happens in computers when there are not enough bits (binary digits) to store the result of a calculation, and typically happens in computers at a given power of two, such as 128. An unsigned 7-bit number can hold the values 0 to 127 (127 being 27 - 1) and an attempt to go beyond 127 will overflow, also called rollover, back to zero. 7-bit numbers are not common native values in today's computers. For the more usual integers of one byte (8 bits), while a signed byte would roll over after 127, it would typically rollover to -128 rather than to zero, whereas an unsigned byte would rollover to zero but not until after 255.

A signed 8-bit number uses the first bit to allow the value from the remaining seven to be negative, the value 128 would become either -128 or -0, depending upon implementation. In its most practical form, a signed 8-bit number can hold values from -128 to 127 and when calculating 127+1 (the binary value 01111111 changing to 10000000) the value is -128 due to the {{w|Two's Complement}} method of having the sign-bit represent the most negative value possible, which is generally a more utilitarian method than the 'simpler' method of using it to indicate the positivity/negativity of the value. Either way, though, this means you could have a weird experience of your next phase of life, as your age now is interpreted as successive negative values if the incrementing algorithm and the interpreting algorithm are not thinking about the raw bits in the same way, or at least flagging up the overflow as having happened.

However, maybe the system uses just 7 bits (the 8th bit often used to be reserved for parity, or other flagging purposes, and otherwise stripped/ignored) if it has never before needed an eighth bit and this had once seemed like a sufficient form of data-packing with no expectation that this limit would be reached. Computers using such systems would have a Y2K-analogous bug once someone actually reached 128 years old, where anomalous processing might indicate the person to be a baby (or fail in other ways). But that would not have happened yet.

|}

The title text mentions {{w|Jeanne Calment}}, who holds the record for the oldest person ever (there are biblical references to older people, such as {{w|Methuselah}}, who supposedly lived to 969, but their ages haven't been verified). She reportedly was age 122 when she died in 1997. There's some controversy whether Calment actually claimed her mother's records, including birth certificate, as her own. "Editing wars" have been fought over her Wikipedia page. Randall claims that if you match her age you get sole editorial control over that article. However, if anyone managed to exceed her achieved age, presumably they would get their own page (albeit that they should not be encouraged to {{w|Wikipedia:Editing Your Own Page|edit it}} themselves) and hers would cease to be as interesting - although that might depend on what use is made of the unparalleled editorial control now granted.

==Transcript==

<big>Age Milestones</big> 
and associated privileges

16  Drive 
17  Attend R-rated movies alone 
18  Vote 
21  Buy alcohol 
25  Rent a car 
32  Run for senate 
35  Run for president 
40  Rent a flying car 
45  Learn about the God-Empress 
50  Join AARP 
50  Get a shingles vaccine 
52  Click to skip captchas 
55  Vote for God-Empress 
62  $80 National parks lifetime pass 
65  Eligible for Medicare 
67  Collect Social Security 
68  See "Skip Ads" button on live TV 
70  Run for God-Empress 
75  Ride any animal in a national park 
80  Eligible for MegaCare 
85  Click to toggle whether any ad is positive or negative about the product 
90  Click to make any movie R-rated 
100  Get a letter from the president 
102  (35+67) Collect a presidential pension 
105  Get a birthday card from the God-Empress 
111  Leave your own birthday party early by putting on a magic ring 
118  Vote 100 times 
120  Collect the pensions of all elected officials 
125  Drink alcohol in an R-rated movie while getting a shingles vaccine from the president 
128  Age rolls over, become a baby again

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:CAPTCHA]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] 
[[Category:Wikipedia]]

2625: Field Topology

2022-08-30T00:42:48Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ move to correct location

{{comic
| number = 2625
| date = May 27, 2022
| title = Field Topology
| image = field_topology.png
| titletext = The combination croquet set/10-lane pool can also be used for some varieties of foosball and Skee-Ball.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A NEGATIVE SPACE WEDGIE THROUGH THE HANDLE OF A COFFEE MUG. Please make sure the topological holes through the playing space have been corrected for each sport, and edit for clarity. And maybe move the mathematical fields/Fields Medal diversion to a footnote regarding the title. And could someone please keep track of the linguistic differences between "ellipse", "ellipses", and "ellipsis"? Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Field Topology is [https://encyclopediaofmath.org/wiki/Topological_field a subject in mathematics], but in this comic, Randall is instead examining the topology of playing fields used for various sports. The comic strip depicts a situation in which the common practice of multi-use athletic facilities has been organized by the "topology department" and constructed to be shared by all sports whose normal playing fields are {{w|topology|topologically equivalent}}. One key assumption in topology is that you can ignore the specificities of shape, size and material of the objects concerned. This presents an amusing contrast as the "equivalent" topology department playing fields are actually not very appropriate for the activities listed in the comic, as the standard positioning, size and shape of hoops, nets and bars and the material of the field itself are not equivalent to the real playing fields used for those activities.

(Not to be confused with {{w|Field (mathematics)|mathematical fields}}, or the {{w|Fields Medal}} prize -- although the concept is likely a further pun in the comic, as math (including topology), and most things once can imagine really, are mostly performed ("played") within mathematical fields.)

In topology, shapes which can be smoothly deformed into one another without adding or removing holes are considered equivalent. A topological hole is an area of the nominal space (or area, or other manifold) through which nothing restricted to this topology can pass. A loop is a path across the allowable territory of a topology (or a viable circuit to make through the world it describes) that end up where it started. For example, when describing the space taken up by a solid object such as a coffee mug, the handle forms a loop with a hole through it. If a loop cannot be tightened (ultimately adjusted to take a shorter path) down to a single point, then it must be wrapped around at least one "topological hole", and you have separately unique paths (or points, i.e., on different disconnected topologies) where you cannot adjust one loop to take the route of another without severing a looped path and reconnecting it.

When describing a negative space, such as the space around an archway, the 'hole' would be the material of the arch itself. This is because a loop formed by a ring around any part of the arch material can only be shortened to a finite length, not to a point; the 'hole' is the arch-shaped obstruction which forces the existence of these loops. A {{w|basketball}} hoop connected to the ground forms a similar obstruction with a loop through it, so the space around the hoop contains an equivalent hole. In this comic the topology department has analysed the spaces where various sports are played by the number of such obstructions in the playing area. Each space depicted in the comic is then signposted with the sports which are played on a field with that number of holes.

{{w|Baseball}}, {{w|tetherball}} and {{w|soccer}} are played on fields which are continuous in three-dimensional space. This means it is possible to traverse any path around or over any of the structures defining the field, while there are no obstructions which can be traversed through in a loop around them. The goals on a soccer field presumably do not create holes because the goalposts and crossbar are connected to the field by the net; Randall apparently considers these to form continuous surfaces which do not allow loops through them.

{{w|Volleyball}} and {{w|badminton}} are played using a net suspended from poles, and the {{w|high jump}} has a bar that contestants jump over. The structure formed by the net or bar and the supporting poles can be considered to be a "hole" through the playing field, as a path over and under the net/bar forming a loop cannot be contracted to a single point, so their playing fields in the comic all have one "hole".

[[File:Double torus illustration.png|thumb|150px|A genus two surface]]

A basketball court has two hoops. {{w|Parallel bars}} can be thought of as two archways. Both have opportunities to pass through either (or both) structures, and so the material of the structures define a hole in the topological abstract of the playing 'space'. Since we are told that these sports fields belong to the Topology Department - and are not necessarily generalized to all sports fields - we might assume that their "football" field is either for {{w|Rugby_sevens|rugby}} or for American football using H-shaped {{w|Goal (sports)|uprights}}.

An {{w|Olympic-sized_swimming_pool|Olympic-sized swimming pool}} has ten lanes, and thus nine lane dividers which are fastened to the walls of the pool at each end, creating topological holes through the play area. Each hoop in {{w|croquet}} is similarly a hole through the space; while most versions of croquet use six hoops, nine hoops are used for "backyard croquet" which is played recreationally in the United States and Canada. The fact that the space in a swimming pool is typically filled with water{{citation needed}} has been overlooked by the topology department.

As mentioned in the title text, this last configuration is also {{w|homeomorphism|homeomorphic}} to a {{w|foosball}} table (with each rod sustaining the player figures above the table defining a hole) or a {{w|Skee-Ball}} lane (which is even more straightforward, as it is just a plane with several holes in which to throw balls). These "fields" don't actually have the same number of holes, but are apparently lumped together by the Topology Department as having "many" holes.

Unfortunately, the Topology Department does not seem to have a field for {{w|hurdling}} events.

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

:[A row of four signs, each held up by two posts, followed by a row of four rounded lozenge shapes, one for each sign. The signs and lozenge shapes are shaded as if three-dimensional objects, all being flattish with a small third dimension; the four lozenge shapes each have one pair of sides horizontal and the other pair at a slight angle from vertical, denoting a horizontal plane perpendicular to the signs extending "out" towards the viewer, which places each shape "in front" of its sign. All but the first lozenge shape have various numbers of ellipses within the shape - ovoids shaded to denote holes piercing through the objects.]

:[Leftmost sign:]
:Baseball
:Soccer
:Tetherball
:[The shape below this sign contains no ellipses.]

:[Second sign from left:]
:Volleyball
:Badminton
:High jump
:[This shape has one large ellipse in the center.]

:[Third sign:]
:Basketball
:Football
:Parallel bars
:[This shape has two large ellipses - one in the top half and one in the bottom half.]

:[Fourth and rightmost sign:]
:Olympic swimming
:Croquet
:[This shape has nine small ellipses - eight arranged symmetrically towards the edges of the shape and one in the center.]

:[Caption underneath the signs and shapes:]
:No one ever wants to use the topology department's athletic fields.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Sport]]

2664: Cloud Swirls

2022-08-29T23:33:10Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ clarify

{{comic
| number = 2664
| date = August 26, 2022
| title = Cloud Swirls
| image = cloud_swirls.png
| titletext = 'Why did you get into fluid dynamics?' 'Well, SOME planet has to have the coolest clouds, odds are it's not ours, and rockets are slow.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a UNIVERSE WITH NOTHING BETTER TO DO EXCEPT MAKE CLOUDS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There are planets.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet] A lot of them, even.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets] Like our planet, for instance.[https://phl.upr.edu/projects/earth-similarity-index-esi]

In 3D software, depictions are often rendered at a lower quality when the viewer's perspective is far away from them, to save on computational work for aspects the user can't clearly discern. This idea is built upon here, conceivably to suggest how {{w|Simulation hypothesis|simulations of universes}} might seem different than base reality to observers within them.

In this comic, [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] theorize that complicated cloud formations occur naturally on other planets in other solar systems. On planets with no observers to look at the clouds closely, our universe, or the simulation thereof, might not afford to render a visual depiction of the atmosphere in higher quality. Meteorologists and physicists on Earth might notice that the exoplanet atmosphere does not obey formal {{w|Navier-Stokes}} {{w|fluid dynamics}}, but instead reflects low-quality corner-cutting of such calculations. The foregoing would make sense if the Universe is actually simulated by a computer (a 43% probability[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA5YuwvJkpQ&t=20m]) and the beings that are running the physics simulator, or have coded our universe, wanted to speed things up.

{{cot|Further considerations}}
However:

* Much more computing power could be saved by skimping on the chemistry of the quattuordecillions of atoms in the oceans than the clouds in the sky (especially considering that it would not be necessary to simulate every individual atom and molecule in the sky (for the purpose of making realistic clouds with fluid dynamics); the computer program could instead divide all of the gas particles (e.g., dinitrogen, dioxygen, water vapor, argon, and carbon dioxide) into small chunks, simulate how each chunk would move, and update the chunk boundaries every so often), but skimping on oceanic chemistry would make biogenesis much less feasible. However, Earth has life.{{Citation needed}}

* It would be difficult to judge when "no one is looking closely". There are many organisms that have some degree of at least rudimentary sight but would have no idea (and in fact no way to conceptualize) whether the computer simulating the Universe is skimping on the cloud-rendering calculations or not. It would be difficult to make some foolproof intelligent-sight-detecting code that would render the clouds with much greater precision once a planet had life that would notice if the clouds were following lazy fluid dynamics.
** For one thing, this would not only depend on a species's intelligence but also on its knowledge of physics; e.g., humans did not develop the Navier-Stokes equations right after evolving large enough brains to conceive and understand them. Even coding a computer program to detect sight-having life would be difficult, at least for a computer program only looking at the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons; for example, a blue photon hitting a retinal molecule in a cone cell, causing it to change shape, which triggers a signal transduction cascade that sends a nervous signal to the optical cortex somewhat resembles an ultraviolet photon hitting a DNA strand, leading to the creation of a thymine dimer whose detection by DNA-repairing enzymes triggers a signal transduction cascade that increases the production of melanin, but only one counts as sight.
** Furthermore, assuming that the computer simulates each part of the Universe in a manner that is is about synchronized according to most celestial bodies, when the computer simulating the Universe simulates a planet, it does not know whether a civilization on a planet a dozen or two light-years away that has advanced enough to have telescopes capable of detailed views of the clouds of planets light-years away will point any telescopes at that planet dozens of light-years later.
***Even if the advanced civilization on another planet does not have such powerful telescopes yet, even a low-resolution (in terms of that planet's entire solar system being one pixel) spectrometer would be enough to reveal that something is up with the fluid dynamics simulations on that planet. Observers light-years away could deduce how much condensed water vapor there is in the atmosphere by calculating the atmosphere's absorbance in a wavelength where condensed water has a low but detectable absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for, and then one can deduce how compact the clouds are from that and the absorbance of a wavelength where condensed water has a high absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for. (Actually, in order to calculate the amount and compactlygroupedness of condensed water in the atmosphere from the raw numbers/direct measurements, the scientists would have to know not only the absoprtivity of condensed water suspended in air as clouds but also characteristics of the planet such as its radius and the thickness of its atmosphere. There are also other complicated factors, such as that some of the aerosolized water in clouds is in the form of solid ice, not liquid water. However, the scientists would still notice if the raw numbers from the more rudimentary observational equipment suddenly changed the second they switched on a more powerful telescope, so the following point still stands.) If the computer simulating the Universe did not switch to the more precise simulation of the planet's atmosphere in time for the scientists to only see spectrographs of the planet's atmosphere rendered with precise calculations, then if the scientists later developed a more powerful telescope, like the one described earlier, and then pointed it at the planet, either they would see poorly-rendered clouds and know that the Universe is simulated by a computer that skimps on the fluid dynamics calculations for the atmospheres of certain planets, or the measurements from transit spectrography would suddenly change, so the scientists would know that something weird was going on—although probably not exactly what. This is important because it is more feasible for a society to develop low-resolution transit spectrography quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard than it would be for a society to develop the technology required for a telescope advanced enough to look at the clouds of a planet in another solar system with high enough resolution to determine whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard. However, either could conceivably catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard because it would be difficult for a computer to deduce whether a planet has life and how technologically advanced the life of any planet that has life is when the only raw data for the computer to work with are the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons.

* If atmospheric physics suddenly changed upon the evolution of a species capable of distinguishing whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer program that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations, that would likely cause sudden changes in the climate, and the resulting heat waves, droughts, freezes, famines, floods, storms, and/or other (formerly) extreme weather would likely drive that species extinct (considering that it had just evolved, so it would have a small population and therefore be especially susceptible to natural disasters) because it would not have evolved to survive in such conditions. Such disasters and climate changes) would not have to directly kill all members of the species in order to drive it extinct; they could instead diminish the size of the gene pool by killing most of the members or divide the once-larger population into smaller, genetically isolated populations (e.g., by causing the creation of uncrossably swollen rivers dividing what used to be a single genetically-interconnected range into several smaller populations), either of which would cause an unsustainable level of inbreeding that would eventually lead to extinction. However, our species was not driven extinct shortly after it first developed.{{Citation needed}}
{{cob}}

Of course, most people do not think that the Universe is a simulation,{{Actual citation needed}} but society does not know that it isn't a simulation with absolute certainty. There is a direct relationship between the question of the {{w|simulation hypothesis}} in {{w|metaphysics}} and {{w|Pascal's wager}} in {{w|theism}}, ''i.e.,'' whether God(s) exist(s), with weighty implications regarding {{w|free will}} and {{w|determinism}}, such as which raise the question of {{w|Compatibilism#Non-naturalism|non-naturalist compatibilism}}.

Megan proposes an additional theory that the universe is intended to make cool swirly clouds, and that the presence of life to observe these clouds is a bothersome coincidence. This goes against the theory that the Universe must not care about making cool swirly clouds since it wants to skimp on the fluid dynamics calculations. Even among followers of the simulation hypothesis, ascribing sentiment, emotion, or motivations to the entire universe is usually considered to be in jest, because of the dissimilarities between sentient beings and cosmologically distant sets of galaxies.{{citation needed}} This jest forms the basis of the comic's humor.

The title text includes a dialogue with one person asking another why they got into fluid dynamics. The answer implies that the motivation was to simulate the clouds of planetary atmospheres unreachable by today's rocket technology.

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

:[Cueball and Megan looking out at a landscape of clouds]
:Cueball: It's weird to think there are countless planets with air and stuff but no life.
:Cueball: Billions of years of clouds making cool shapes with no one to look at them.

:[Just Cueball and Megan standing next to each other]
:Megan: Yeah, it seems like a waste. The universe getting the complex fluid dynamics right for every momentary swirl of cloud.
:Megan: Just a ''huge'' amount of work.

:[Cueball and Megan walk away to the right]
:Cueball: Maybe atmospheres have smooth laminar flow until someone looks closely.
:Megan: Or maybe the universe just ''likes'' making swirly clouds, and is annoyed that we're watching.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

2664: Cloud Swirls

2022-08-29T22:37:33Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ comma

{{comic
| number = 2664
| date = August 26, 2022
| title = Cloud Swirls
| image = cloud_swirls.png
| titletext = 'Why did you get into fluid dynamics?' 'Well, SOME planet has to have the coolest clouds, odds are it's not ours, and rockets are slow.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a UNIVERSE WITH NOTHING BETTER TO DO EXCEPT MAKE CLOUDS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There are planets.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet] A lot of them, even.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets] Like our planet, for instance.[https://phl.upr.edu/projects/earth-similarity-index-esi]

In 3D software, depictions are often rendered at a lower quality when the viewer's perspective is far away from them, to save on computational work for aspects the user can't clearly discern. This idea is built upon here, conceivably to suggest how {{w|Simulation hypothesis|simulations of universes}} might seem different than the base reality.

In this comic, [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] theorize that complicated cloud formations occur naturally on other planets in other solar systems. On planets with no observers to look at the clouds closely, our universe, or the simulation thereof, might not afford to render a visual depiction of the atmosphere in higher quality. Meteorologists and physicists on Earth might notice that the exoplanet atmosphere does not obey formal {{w|Navier-Stokes}} {{w|fluid dynamics}}, but instead reflects low-quality corner-cutting of such calculations. The foregoing would make sense if the Universe is actually simulated by a computer (a 43% probability[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA5YuwvJkpQ&t=20m]) and the beings that are running the physics simulator, or have coded our universe, wanted to speed things up.

{{cot|Further considerations}}
However:

* Much more computing power could be saved by skimping on the chemistry of the quattuordecillions of atoms in the oceans than the clouds in the sky (especially considering that it would not be necessary to simulate every individual atom and molecule in the sky (for the purpose of making realistic clouds with fluid dynamics); the computer program could instead divide all of the gas particles (e.g., dinitrogen, dioxygen, water vapor, argon, and carbon dioxide) into small chunks, simulate how each chunk would move, and update the chunk boundaries every so often), but skimping on oceanic chemistry would make biogenesis much less feasible. However, Earth has life.{{Citation needed}}

* It would be difficult to judge when "no one is looking closely". There are many organisms that have some degree of at least rudimentary sight but would have no idea (and in fact no way to conceptualize) whether the computer simulating the Universe is skimping on the cloud-rendering calculations or not. It would be difficult to make some foolproof intelligent-sight-detecting code that would render the clouds with much greater precision once a planet had life that would notice if the clouds were following lazy fluid dynamics.
** For one thing, this would not only depend on a species's intelligence but also on its knowledge of physics; e.g., humans did not develop the Navier-Stokes equations right after evolving large enough brains to conceive and understand them. Even coding a computer program to detect sight-having life would be difficult, at least for a computer program only looking at the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons; for example, a blue photon hitting a retinal molecule in a cone cell, causing it to change shape, which triggers a signal transduction cascade that sends a nervous signal to the optical cortex somewhat resembles an ultraviolet photon hitting a DNA strand, leading to the creation of a thymine dimer whose detection by DNA-repairing enzymes triggers a signal transduction cascade that increases the production of melanin, but only one counts as sight.
** Furthermore, assuming that the computer simulates each part of the Universe in a manner that is is about synchronized according to most celestial bodies, when the computer simulating the Universe simulates a planet, it does not know whether a civilization on a planet a dozen or two light-years away that has advanced enough to have telescopes capable of detailed views of the clouds of planets light-years away will point any telescopes at that planet dozens of light-years later.
***Even if the advanced civilization on another planet does not have such powerful telescopes yet, even a low-resolution (in terms of that planet's entire solar system being one pixel) spectrometer would be enough to reveal that something is up with the fluid dynamics simulations on that planet. Observers light-years away could deduce how much condensed water vapor there is in the atmosphere by calculating the atmosphere's absorbance in a wavelength where condensed water has a low but detectable absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for, and then one can deduce how compact the clouds are from that and the absorbance of a wavelength where condensed water has a high absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for. (Actually, in order to calculate the amount and compactlygroupedness of condensed water in the atmosphere from the raw numbers/direct measurements, the scientists would have to know not only the absoprtivity of condensed water suspended in air as clouds but also characteristics of the planet such as its radius and the thickness of its atmosphere. There are also other complicated factors, such as that some of the aerosolized water in clouds is in the form of solid ice, not liquid water. However, the scientists would still notice if the raw numbers from the more rudimentary observational equipment suddenly changed the second they switched on a more powerful telescope, so the following point still stands.) If the computer simulating the Universe did not switch to the more precise simulation of the planet's atmosphere in time for the scientists to only see spectrographs of the planet's atmosphere rendered with precise calculations, then if the scientists later developed a more powerful telescope, like the one described earlier, and then pointed it at the planet, either they would see poorly-rendered clouds and know that the Universe is simulated by a computer that skimps on the fluid dynamics calculations for the atmospheres of certain planets, or the measurements from transit spectrography would suddenly change, so the scientists would know that something weird was going on—although probably not exactly what. This is important because it is more feasible for a society to develop low-resolution transit spectrography quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard than it would be for a society to develop the technology required for a telescope advanced enough to look at the clouds of a planet in another solar system with high enough resolution to determine whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard. However, either could conceivably catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard because it would be difficult for a computer to deduce whether a planet has life and how technologically advanced the life of any planet that has life is when the only raw data for the computer to work with are the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons.

* If atmospheric physics suddenly changed upon the evolution of a species capable of distinguishing whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer program that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations, that would likely cause sudden changes in the climate, and the resulting heat waves, droughts, freezes, famines, floods, storms, and/or other (formerly) extreme weather would likely drive that species extinct (considering that it had just evolved, so it would have a small population and therefore be especially susceptible to natural disasters) because it would not have evolved to survive in such conditions. Such disasters and climate changes) would not have to directly kill all members of the species in order to drive it extinct; they could instead diminish the size of the gene pool by killing most of the members or divide the once-larger population into smaller, genetically isolated populations (e.g., by causing the creation of uncrossably swollen rivers dividing what used to be a single genetically-interconnected range into several smaller populations), either of which would cause an unsustainable level of inbreeding that would eventually lead to extinction. However, our species was not driven extinct shortly after it first developed.{{Citation needed}}
{{cob}}

Of course, most people do not think that the Universe is a simulation,{{Actual citation needed}} but society does not know that it isn't a simulation with absolute certainty. There is a direct relationship between the question of the {{w|simulation hypothesis}} in {{w|metaphysics}} and {{w|Pascal's wager}} in {{w|theism}}, ''i.e.,'' whether God(s) exist(s), with weighty implications regarding {{w|free will}} and {{w|determinism}}, such as which raise the question of {{w|Compatibilism#Non-naturalism|non-naturalist compatibilism}}.

Megan proposes an additional theory that the universe is intended to make cool swirly clouds, and that the presence of life to observe these clouds is a bothersome coincidence. This goes against the theory that the Universe must not care about making cool swirly clouds since it wants to skimp on the fluid dynamics calculations. Even among followers of the simulation hypothesis, ascribing sentiment or emotion to the entire universe is usually considered to be in jest, because of the dissimilarities between sentient beings and cosmologically distant sets of galaxies.{{citation needed}} This jest forms the basis of the comic's humor.

The title text includes a dialogue with one person asking another why they got into fluid dynamics. The answer implies that the motivation was to simulate the clouds of planetary atmospheres unreachable by today's rocket technology.

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

:[Cueball and Megan looking out at a landscape of clouds]
:Cueball: It's weird to think there are countless planets with air and stuff but no life.
:Cueball: Billions of years of clouds making cool shapes with no one to look at them.

:[Just Cueball and Megan standing next to each other]
:Megan: Yeah, it seems like a waste. The universe getting the complex fluid dynamics right for every momentary swirl of cloud.
:Megan: Just a ''huge'' amount of work.

:[Cueball and Megan walk away to the right]
:Cueball: Maybe atmospheres have smooth laminar flow until someone looks closely.
:Megan: Or maybe the universe just ''likes'' making swirly clouds, and is annoyed that we're watching.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

2664: Cloud Swirls

2022-08-29T20:46:06Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ reword, links

{{comic
| number = 2664
| date = August 26, 2022
| title = Cloud Swirls
| image = cloud_swirls.png
| titletext = 'Why did you get into fluid dynamics?' 'Well, SOME planet has to have the coolest clouds, odds are it's not ours, and rockets are slow.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a UNIVERSE WITH NOTHING BETTER TO DO EXCEPT MAKE CLOUDS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There are planets.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet] A lot of them, even.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets] Like our planet, for instance.[https://phl.upr.edu/projects/earth-similarity-index-esi]

In 3D software, depictions are often rendered at a lower quality when the viewer's perspective is far away from them to save on computational work for aspects the user can't clearly discern. This idea is built upon here, conceivably to suggest how {{w|Simulation hypothesis|simulations of universes}} might seem different than the base reality.

In this comic, [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] theorize that complicated cloud formations occur naturally on other planets in other solar systems. On planets with no observers to look at the clouds closely, our universe, or the simulation thereof, might not afford to render a visual depiction of the atmosphere in higher quality. Meteorologists and physicists on Earth might notice that the exoplanet atmosphere does not obey formal {{w|Navier-Stokes}} {{w|fluid dynamics}}, but instead reflects low-quality corner-cutting of such calculations. The foregoing would make sense if the Universe is actually simulated by a computer (a 43% probability[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA5YuwvJkpQ&t=20m]) and the beings that are running the physics simulator, or have coded our universe, wanted to speed things up.

{{cot|Further considerations}}
However:

* Much more computing power could be saved by skimping on the chemistry of the quattuordecillions of atoms in the oceans than the clouds in the sky (especially considering that it would not be necessary to simulate every individual atom and molecule in the sky (for the purpose of making realistic clouds with fluid dynamics); the computer program could instead divide all of the gas particles (e.g., dinitrogen, dioxygen, water vapor, argon, and carbon dioxide) into small chunks, simulate how each chunk would move, and update the chunk boundaries every so often), but skimping on oceanic chemistry would make biogenesis much less feasible. However, Earth has life.{{Citation needed}}

* It would be difficult to judge when "no one is looking closely". There are many organisms that have some degree of at least rudimentary sight but would have no idea (and in fact no way to conceptualize) whether the computer simulating the Universe is skimping on the cloud-rendering calculations or not. It would be difficult to make some foolproof intelligent-sight-detecting code that would render the clouds with much greater precision once a planet had life that would notice if the clouds were following lazy fluid dynamics.
** For one thing, this would not only depend on a species's intelligence but also on its knowledge of physics; e.g., humans did not develop the Navier-Stokes equations right after evolving large enough brains to conceive and understand them. Even coding a computer program to detect sight-having life would be difficult, at least for a computer program only looking at the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons; for example, a blue photon hitting a retinal molecule in a cone cell, causing it to change shape, which triggers a signal transduction cascade that sends a nervous signal to the optical cortex somewhat resembles an ultraviolet photon hitting a DNA strand, leading to the creation of a thymine dimer whose detection by DNA-repairing enzymes triggers a signal transduction cascade that increases the production of melanin, but only one counts as sight.
** Furthermore, assuming that the computer simulates each part of the Universe in a manner that is is about synchronized according to most celestial bodies, when the computer simulating the Universe simulates a planet, it does not know whether a civilization on a planet a dozen or two light-years away that has advanced enough to have telescopes capable of detailed views of the clouds of planets light-years away will point any telescopes at that planet dozens of light-years later.
***Even if the advanced civilization on another planet does not have such powerful telescopes yet, even a low-resolution (in terms of that planet's entire solar system being one pixel) spectrometer would be enough to reveal that something is up with the fluid dynamics simulations on that planet. Observers light-years away could deduce how much condensed water vapor there is in the atmosphere by calculating the atmosphere's absorbance in a wavelength where condensed water has a low but detectable absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for, and then one can deduce how compact the clouds are from that and the absorbance of a wavelength where condensed water has a high absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for. (Actually, in order to calculate the amount and compactlygroupedness of condensed water in the atmosphere from the raw numbers/direct measurements, the scientists would have to know not only the absoprtivity of condensed water suspended in air as clouds but also characteristics of the planet such as its radius and the thickness of its atmosphere. There are also other complicated factors, such as that some of the aerosolized water in clouds is in the form of solid ice, not liquid water. However, the scientists would still notice if the raw numbers from the more rudimentary observational equipment suddenly changed the second they switched on a more powerful telescope, so the following point still stands.) If the computer simulating the Universe did not switch to the more precise simulation of the planet's atmosphere in time for the scientists to only see spectrographs of the planet's atmosphere rendered with precise calculations, then if the scientists later developed a more powerful telescope, like the one described earlier, and then pointed it at the planet, either they would see poorly-rendered clouds and know that the Universe is simulated by a computer that skimps on the fluid dynamics calculations for the atmospheres of certain planets, or the measurements from transit spectrography would suddenly change, so the scientists would know that something weird was going on—although probably not exactly what. This is important because it is more feasible for a society to develop low-resolution transit spectrography quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard than it would be for a society to develop the technology required for a telescope advanced enough to look at the clouds of a planet in another solar system with high enough resolution to determine whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard. However, either could conceivably catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard because it would be difficult for a computer to deduce whether a planet has life and how technologically advanced the life of any planet that has life is when the only raw data for the computer to work with are the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons.

* If atmospheric physics suddenly changed upon the evolution of a species capable of distinguishing whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer program that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations, that would likely cause sudden changes in the climate, and the resulting heat waves, droughts, freezes, famines, floods, storms, and/or other (formerly) extreme weather would likely drive that species extinct (considering that it had just evolved, so it would have a small population and therefore be especially susceptible to natural disasters) because it would not have evolved to survive in such conditions. Such disasters and climate changes) would not have to directly kill all members of the species in order to drive it extinct; they could instead diminish the size of the gene pool by killing most of the members or divide the once-larger population into smaller, genetically isolated populations (e.g., by causing the creation of uncrossably swollen rivers dividing what used to be a single genetically-interconnected range into several smaller populations), either of which would cause an unsustainable level of inbreeding that would eventually lead to extinction. However, our species was not driven extinct shortly after it first developed.{{Citation needed}}
{{cob}}

Of course, most people do not think that the Universe is a simulation,{{Actual citation needed}} but society does not know that it isn't a simulation with absolute certainty. There is a direct relationship between the question of the {{w|simulation hypothesis}} in {{w|metaphysics}} and {{w|Pascal's wager}} in {{w|theism}}, ''i.e.,'' whether God(s) exist(s).

Megan proposes an additional theory that the universe is just about making cool swirly clouds, and that the presence of life to observe these clouds is a bothersome coincidence. This goes against the theory that the Universe must not care about making cool swirly clouds since it wants to skimp on the fluid dynamics calculations. Even among followers of the simulation hypothesis, ascribing sentiment or emotion to the entire universe is usually considered to be in jest, because of the dissimilarities between sentient beings and cosmologically distant sets of galaxies.{{citation needed}}

The title text includes a dialogue with one person asking another why they got into fluid dynamics. The answer implies that the motivation was to simulate the clouds of planetary atmospheres unreachable by today's rocket technology.

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

:[Cueball and Megan looking out at a landscape of clouds]
:Cueball: It's weird to think there are countless planets with air and stuff but no life.
:Cueball: Billions of years of clouds making cool shapes with no one to look at them.

:[Just Cueball and Megan standing next to each other]
:Megan: Yeah, it seems like a waste. The universe getting the complex fluid dynamics right for every momentary swirl of cloud.
:Megan: Just a ''huge'' amount of work.

:[Cueball and Megan walk away to the right]
:Cueball: Maybe atmospheres have smooth laminar flow until someone looks closely.
:Megan: Or maybe the universe just ''likes'' making swirly clouds, and is annoyed that we're watching.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

2664: Cloud Swirls

2022-08-29T20:42:51Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ reword

{{comic
| number = 2664
| date = August 26, 2022
| title = Cloud Swirls
| image = cloud_swirls.png
| titletext = 'Why did you get into fluid dynamics?' 'Well, SOME planet has to have the coolest clouds, odds are it's not ours, and rockets are slow.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a UNIVERSE WITH NOTHING BETTER TO DO EXCEPT MAKE CLOUDS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There are planets.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet] A lot of them, even.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets] Like our planet, for instance.[https://phl.upr.edu/projects/earth-similarity-index-esi]

In 3D software, depictions are often rendered at a lower quality when the viewer's perspective is far away from them to save on computational work for aspects the user can't clearly discern. This idea is built upon here, conceivably to suggest how {{w|Simulation hypothesis|simulations of universes}} might seem different than the base reality.

In this comic, [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] theorize that complicated cloud formations occur naturally on other planets in other solar systems. On planets with no observers to look at the clouds closely, our universe, or the simulation thereof, might not afford to render a visual depiction of the atmosphere in higher quality. Meteorologists and physicists on Earth might notice that the exoplanet atmosphere does not obey Navier-Stokes fluid dynamics equations, but instead reflects low-quality skimping on fluid dynamics calculations. The foregoing would make sense if the Universe is actually simulated by a computer (a 43% probability[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA5YuwvJkpQ&t=20m]) and the beings that are running the physics simulator, or have coded our universe, wanted to speed things up.

{{cot|Further considerations}}
However:

* Much more computing power could be saved by skimping on the chemistry of the quattuordecillions of atoms in the oceans than the clouds in the sky (especially considering that it would not be necessary to simulate every individual atom and molecule in the sky (for the purpose of making realistic clouds with fluid dynamics); the computer program could instead divide all of the gas particles (e.g., dinitrogen, dioxygen, water vapor, argon, and carbon dioxide) into small chunks, simulate how each chunk would move, and update the chunk boundaries every so often), but skimping on oceanic chemistry would make biogenesis much less feasible. However, Earth has life.{{Citation needed}}

* It would be difficult to judge when "no one is looking closely". There are many organisms that have some degree of at least rudimentary sight but would have no idea (and in fact no way to conceptualize) whether the computer simulating the Universe is skimping on the cloud-rendering calculations or not. It would be difficult to make some foolproof intelligent-sight-detecting code that would render the clouds with much greater precision once a planet had life that would notice if the clouds were following lazy fluid dynamics.
** For one thing, this would not only depend on a species's intelligence but also on its knowledge of physics; e.g., humans did not develop the Navier-Stokes equations right after evolving large enough brains to conceive and understand them. Even coding a computer program to detect sight-having life would be difficult, at least for a computer program only looking at the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons; for example, a blue photon hitting a retinal molecule in a cone cell, causing it to change shape, which triggers a signal transduction cascade that sends a nervous signal to the optical cortex somewhat resembles an ultraviolet photon hitting a DNA strand, leading to the creation of a thymine dimer whose detection by DNA-repairing enzymes triggers a signal transduction cascade that increases the production of melanin, but only one counts as sight.
** Furthermore, assuming that the computer simulates each part of the Universe in a manner that is is about synchronized according to most celestial bodies, when the computer simulating the Universe simulates a planet, it does not know whether a civilization on a planet a dozen or two light-years away that has advanced enough to have telescopes capable of detailed views of the clouds of planets light-years away will point any telescopes at that planet dozens of light-years later.
***Even if the advanced civilization on another planet does not have such powerful telescopes yet, even a low-resolution (in terms of that planet's entire solar system being one pixel) spectrometer would be enough to reveal that something is up with the fluid dynamics simulations on that planet. Observers light-years away could deduce how much condensed water vapor there is in the atmosphere by calculating the atmosphere's absorbance in a wavelength where condensed water has a low but detectable absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for, and then one can deduce how compact the clouds are from that and the absorbance of a wavelength where condensed water has a high absorptivity and everything else in that planet's atmosphere either has a negligible absorptivity or can be compensated for. (Actually, in order to calculate the amount and compactlygroupedness of condensed water in the atmosphere from the raw numbers/direct measurements, the scientists would have to know not only the absoprtivity of condensed water suspended in air as clouds but also characteristics of the planet such as its radius and the thickness of its atmosphere. There are also other complicated factors, such as that some of the aerosolized water in clouds is in the form of solid ice, not liquid water. However, the scientists would still notice if the raw numbers from the more rudimentary observational equipment suddenly changed the second they switched on a more powerful telescope, so the following point still stands.) If the computer simulating the Universe did not switch to the more precise simulation of the planet's atmosphere in time for the scientists to only see spectrographs of the planet's atmosphere rendered with precise calculations, then if the scientists later developed a more powerful telescope, like the one described earlier, and then pointed it at the planet, either they would see poorly-rendered clouds and know that the Universe is simulated by a computer that skimps on the fluid dynamics calculations for the atmospheres of certain planets, or the measurements from transit spectrography would suddenly change, so the scientists would know that something weird was going on—although probably not exactly what. This is important because it is more feasible for a society to develop low-resolution transit spectrography quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard than it would be for a society to develop the technology required for a telescope advanced enough to look at the clouds of a planet in another solar system with high enough resolution to determine whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations quickly enough to catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard. However, either could conceivably catch the computer simulating the Universe off-guard because it would be difficult for a computer to deduce whether a planet has life and how technologically advanced the life of any planet that has life is when the only raw data for the computer to work with are the positions and velocities of atoms, electrons, and photons.

* If atmospheric physics suddenly changed upon the evolution of a species capable of distinguishing whether the atmosphere is simulated by a computer program that is skimping on the fluid dynamics calculations, that would likely cause sudden changes in the climate, and the resulting heat waves, droughts, freezes, famines, floods, storms, and/or other (formerly) extreme weather would likely drive that species extinct (considering that it had just evolved, so it would have a small population and therefore be especially susceptible to natural disasters) because it would not have evolved to survive in such conditions. Such disasters and climate changes) would not have to directly kill all members of the species in order to drive it extinct; they could instead diminish the size of the gene pool by killing most of the members or divide the once-larger population into smaller, genetically isolated populations (e.g., by causing the creation of uncrossably swollen rivers dividing what used to be a single genetically-interconnected range into several smaller populations), either of which would cause an unsustainable level of inbreeding that would eventually lead to extinction. However, our species was not driven extinct shortly after it first developed.{{Citation needed}}
{{cob}}

Of course, most people do not think that the Universe is a simulation,{{Actual citation needed}} but society does not know that it isn't a simulation with absolute certainty. There is a direct relationship between the question of the {{w|simulation hypothesis}} in {{w|metaphysics}} and {{w|Pascal's wager}} in {{w|theism}}, ''i.e.,'' whether God(s) exist(s).

Megan proposes an additional theory that the universe is just about making cool swirly clouds, and that the presence of life to observe these clouds is a bothersome coincidence. This goes against the theory that the Universe must not care about making cool swirly clouds since it wants to skimp on the fluid dynamics calculations. Even among followers of the simulation hypothesis, ascribing sentiment or emotion to the entire universe is usually considered to be in jest, because of the dissimilarities between sentient beings and cosmologically distant sets of galaxies.{{citation needed}}

The title text includes a dialogue with one person asking another why they got into fluid dynamics. The answer implies that the motivation was to simulate the clouds of planetary atmospheres unreachable by today's rocket technology.

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

:[Cueball and Megan looking out at a landscape of clouds]
:Cueball: It's weird to think there are countless planets with air and stuff but no life.
:Cueball: Billions of years of clouds making cool shapes with no one to look at them.

:[Just Cueball and Megan standing next to each other]
:Megan: Yeah, it seems like a waste. The universe getting the complex fluid dynamics right for every momentary swirl of cloud.
:Megan: Just a ''huge'' amount of work.

:[Cueball and Megan walk away to the right]
:Cueball: Maybe atmospheres have smooth laminar flow until someone looks closely.
:Megan: Or maybe the universe just ''likes'' making swirly clouds, and is annoyed that we're watching.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

2644: fMRI Billboard

2022-08-24T06:54:22Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ recopy editword

{{comic
| number = 2644
| date = July 11, 2022
| title = fMRI Billboard
| image = fmri_billboard.png
| titletext = [other side] If the first word of an instruction you're given starts with the same letter as your crush's name, for that step imagine the experimenter is your crush.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by A SOCIAL NETWORK THAT CHANGES YOUR MEDICAL RECORD. Article needs description of the common studies and brain areas referenced by the comic, and how the suggested behaviors would alter the results. - Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

{{w|Functional magnetic resonance imaging}}, or fMRI, is a method of imaging brain activity by detecting blood flow changes apparent from magnetic differences between oxygenated and deoxygenated {{w|hemoglobin}}. Scientists use fMRI to try to detect deception and false memories,[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763419301873] plan brain surgery,[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213158217303133] and understand the relationship between brain structures and cognition,[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763419300879] among many other investigations. Volunteer research subjects [https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ participate in such studies] by lying inside large toroidal scanners while conducting tasks with projected images, sounds, and the like.

This comic shows a billboard erected by a neuroscience department in an attempt at sabotaging a rival department's volunteer subject compliance with their fMRI study instructions, by suggesting behaviors which would likely produce unexpected results, such as recalling a frightening memory after seeing similar stimulus slides, or imagining the lab technician is a romantic interest when reading words that begin with the same letter as their name. This is funny because academic department rivalries do not usually lead to sabotage,{{citation needed}} and in the rare cases when they do, it's usually clandestine instead of so absurdly blatant. The comic also shows neuroscience in terms of the technologies used to study it, and how experiment instructions can influence its development.

Following such suggestions or even inadvertently remembering them during an fMRI could very well interfere with its results. fMRI experiments are often criticized because they have low {{w|statistical power}} and can easily be confounded by experiment subject error in following instructions, among many other variables. In a famous 2009 study, a dead fish was shown to have apparent evidence of brain activity when scanned with ordinary fMRI techniques.[http://prefrontal.org/files/posters/Bennett-Salmon-2009.pdf] In 2015, discovery of a statistical error invalidated at least 40,000 fMRI studies.[https://www.sciencealert.com/a-bug-in-fmri-software-could-invalidate-decades-of-brain-research-scientists-discover] Subsequently in 2017, many more fMRI results were further discredited due to poor software parameter selection.[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5487467]

The title text indicates that the sabotaging instructions are printed on both sides of the billboard, suggesting that it might have been erected on the grounds of the targeted rival department. Alternately, the instructions on the other side may be intended to disrupt research at the other institution.

==Transcript==
:[A large, building-sized billboard rises over what appears to be a college campus. The sign is supported by two sturdy planks disappearing behind one of two long one story buildings lying next to each other. The board is higher than the buildings and almost as long as the one it stands behind. That building seems to have a flat roof where the other has a peaked roof. It could, though, be a matter of perspective, and that both buildings have the same kind of peaked roof. There are several windows visible in both buildings and a door in the middle of the one with the billboard. There is a forest behind the buildings. In front of the main building there is a path with a round area just outside the door. The path goes past the next building, with yet another round area between the buildings. These round areas are where two paths crosses. Megan is standing outside the door, Cueball walks towards the round area between the buildings, Ponytail sits on the grass between the two paths going away from the buildings, she sits near a tree. Closer to the tree and also closer to the buildings another Ponytail like girl is standing together with Hairbun. The sign reads:]
: ⚠ Student fMRI study volunteers ⚠
: Remember, when you're in the scanner, if you see a slide that's similar to one they already showed you, think as hard as you can about your scariest memory.

:[Caption below panel:]
:A rival neuroscience department keeps trying to sabotage our experiments.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Psychology]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Scientific research]]

2662: Physics Safety Tip

2022-08-23T17:01:15Z

172.70.206.163: Added citation needed

{{comic
| number = 2662
| date = August 22, 2022
| title = Physics Safety Tip
| image = physics_safety_tip.png
| titletext = In general, avoid exposure to any temperatures, pressures, particle energies, or states of matter that physicists think are neat.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT PHYSICISTS ARE EXCITED ABOUT (STEP AWAY, BUSTER) - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
In general, there are very narrow ranges of temperature, pressure, and chemical makeup humans can survive in. Human physicists necessarily spend all their time in these conditions and think of them as ordinary. They have thoroughly studied everything there is to study about these ordinary conditions{{citation needed}}, which makes them now boring. Instead physicists study more extreme conditions, most of which would be quickly lethal to humans — anything from the core of stars to the vacuum of space and many, many things in between. Thus, extreme conditions are very dangerous for most organisms. Even for especially resilient organisms, such as tardigrades, there is a point past which they will [https://what-if.xkcd.com/141/ stop being biology and start being physics], in which case their resilience will not save them. Thus, if a physicist is excited about something, it likely exists in circumstances where your own existence—as well as other life—would meet an end. One (partial) exception is particle beams; {{w|Anatoli Bugorski|people can stick their heads in particle beams and survive—but not unscathed.}} Also, physicists used to be excited about (particles produced by) cosmic rays before they had powerful accelerators.

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

:General Physics Safety Tip:
:[The next line of text is shown in gray.]
:(From ''What If 2'', xkcd.com/whatif2)

:[A flowchart consisting of three rectangular boxes, a diamond box, and three arrows is shown.]

:[The first rectangular box, at the top, is the starting point. It says:]
:Should I stand near this thing?

:[A down-pointing arrow leads to a diamond decision box. Two arrows lead from it, one pointing to the right and labeled "No", the other pointing down and labeled "Yes". The diamond box reads:]
:Are physicists excited about it?

:[The "No" arrow from the diamond box leads to the following rectangular box:]
:Maybe

:[The "Yes" arrow from the diamond box leads to the following rectangular box:]
:No

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Tips]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Flowcharts]]
[[Category:Book promotion]]

Talk:2660: Gen Z

2022-08-18T06:10:07Z

172.70.206.163:

It makes sense that Randall isn't calling out any particular fads, trends, tendencies, or commonalities in Gen Z to comment on, but some immediately came to my mind as I read the comic. Is it worth putting a list of possibilities in the explanation, or just one or two examples? That knowledge probably isn't going to contribute to the understanding of the joke, which is that for *every* generation there have been such observations and complaints from older folks. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 21:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
:I don't think there's a need for that, but someone should add a definition of Generation Z. The Wikipedia page that it links to should describe the notable features of that generation. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 22:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I found the title text in the New Zealand Mail, Issue 1729, 19 April 1905, Page 15 (https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZMAIL19050419.2.44).

holy shit randall is based --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 01:35, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
:Based on what? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.125|162.158.159.125]] 03:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
::Based is a term I have heard of, it means really like something but you say it in a jokey, possibly sarcastic way. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.163|172.70.206.163]] 06:10, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

2659: Unreliable Connection

2022-08-16T00:00:05Z

172.70.206.163: Explain the simple 50-50 case quantitatively; apologies to whoever looked up that cute Pachinko article.

{{comic
| number = 2659
| date = August 15, 2022
| title = Unreliable Connection
| image = unreliable_connection.png
| titletext = NEGATIVE REVIEWS MENTION: Unreliable internet. POSITIVE REVIEWS MENTION: Unreliable internet.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by ROUND TRIP LATENCY BACKOFF. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic, [[Randall]] solves the social problem of demands for {{w|synchronous conferencing|synchronous teleconferencing}} with a deliberately less than optimal internet device that causes {{w|Asynchronous communication|asynchronous}} methods of communication to be relatively more reliable and efficient for personal use. The device appears to be an automated version of {{w|Jin Akiyama}}'s mathematical {{w|pachinko}} machine[https://arxiv.org/pdf/1601.05706.pdf] with a series eleven "on" and one "off" switches at the bottom to be pressed by falling balls. This is funny because such a device could likely much more easily be implemented in the {{w|firmware}} of the internet or WiFi {{w|modem}} or {{w|Router (computing)|router}}s.

Assuming the machine is symmetric, the probability of a single ball hitting the "off" switch is 165/2048, or about 8%.
We don't know the frequency with which new balls are dropped, so we can't estimate the frequency with which the device is likely to trigger {{w|Session Initiation Protocol}}, {{w|Transmission Control Protocol}}, or similar {{w|Timeout (computing)|timeout}} conditions that would likely close synchronous {{w|VOIP}}, video conferencing, and e.g. {{w|VRChat}} connections. Even if such connections were to survive the induced service interruptions, the {{w|application layer}} call or teleconference quality would suffer during them. The device may cause interruptions rarely enough that the connection is usable for casual purposes, but the user can still reasonably claim that it's unreliable to get out of online obligations.

The title text reflects on the mild paradox that a nominally unreliable internet connection has advantages for those whose communication schedules, volume, or style preferences make synchronous teleconferencing less practical.

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

{{comic discussion}}

2659: Unreliable Connection

2022-08-15T22:34:33Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ title text start

2659: Unreliable Connection

2022-08-15T22:31:11Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ spelling

2659: Unreliable Connection

2022-08-15T22:30:48Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ start

2657: Complex Vowels

2022-08-12T19:38:55Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ deduplicate produce

{{comic
| number = 2657
| date = August 10, 2022
| title = Complex Vowels
| image = complex_vowels.png
| titletext = Pronouncing [ṡṡċċḣḣẇẇȧȧ] is easy; you just say it like the 'x' in 'fire'.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a ROUNDED TONGUE. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[[File:Ipa-chart-vowels.png|thumb|200px|The standard IPA vowel chart.]]
This is another one of Randall's [[:Category:Tips|Tips]], this time a Linguistics Tip. The curly-haired linguist, [[:Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch|Gretchen McCulloch]], manages to produce a cursed sound using complex vowels, that cannot be comprehended by normal humans like [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]], who both seem to get a headache from listening to the sound. The sound she makes was produced by extending the IPA vowel plane along an imaginary axis to form the complex vowels.

In phonetics based on the {{w|International Phonetic Alphabet}} (IPA), the space of {{w|vocal tract}} articulators determining {{w|vowel}}s  is represented as three dimensional, from the position of the tongue and lips. The vertical axis represents vowel height or ''closedness'' (i.e., how close or far the tongue is from the top of the mouth), and the horizontal axis represents front-to-back ''place'' (i.e., how close or far the top of the tongue is from the teeth.) The position of the tongue, along with the frequency of the {{w|vocal cords}} vibrating in the larynx from air being exhaled by the diaphragm, are the primary determinants of the fundamental and second {{w|formant}} frequencies of vowel sounds. A third dimension of vowel sounds is the "roundedness" of the lips, represented on the IPA vowel chart to the right by pairs of vowel phoneme {{w|glyph}}s. Other higher-dimensional vowel representations include {{w|diphthong}}s, which are simply two different sequential vowels slurred together; diphones, which represent the last half of one phoneme followed by the first half of the next; {{w|vowel shift}} mappings delineating different accents[https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/47086396.pdf][https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0095447010000562] and long-term evolution of voiced phone sounds; and {{w|cepstrum|cepstral}} representations such as {{w|Mel-frequency cepstrum|mel-frequency cepstral coefficients}}.

[[Randall]] suggests increasing the range of vowel sounds available by using complex notation to indicate an additional dimension with an "imaginary" axis. In mathematics, {{w|complex number}}s are numbers including both real numbers and {{w|imaginary number}}s. A complex number can be expressed as, "''a'' + ''b''i," where ''a'' and ''b'' are real numbers, but the latter imaginary part is combined with 'i,' the square root of negative one, as depicted in the central expression in the comic by √-̅1̅, indicating a further dimension of coordinates. When expanding the one-dimensional number line with an imaginary axis, it becomes two-dimensional with the "''b''i" component {{w|orthogonal}} to the original "real" number line. Linguists never use the {{w|complex plane}} to represent vowel roundedness or any other higher-dimensional features of phonemes, although the properties of complex numbers could conceivably support representing physiological features of the vocal tract, such as prior position of the articulators.{{cn}}

This comic conflates complex numbers in mathematics with "complex vowels" in linguistics. Such complex vowels are implied to create sounds which cannot be properly processed by the human brain, represented graphically as {{w|Zalgo text}} IPA, similarly to the cliché of "black speech" in {{w|Lovecraftian horror}}, a language created by alien beings with different vocal patterns than humans. In reality, people find Zalgo text amusing, thus the humor of the comic, but not particularly insanity-inducing or even more than mildly confusing.{{cn}} This is also funny because unadorned IPA shares some characteristics with Zalgo text, such as extremely uncommon glyphs and weird {{w|diacritics}}.

In linguistics, 'ə' is the {{w|schwa}} symbol, referred to in the title text and the depiction of complex phonemes, the most common vowel sound in English polysyllabic words (the 'a' in "comma" or the second 'e' in "letter.") Production of the schwa sound takes place with the tongue, jaw, and lips all in a relaxed, central position. The pronunciation of "[ṡṡċċḣḣẇẇȧȧ]" in the title text is said to sound like the x in the word fire. In fact, there is no x in fire. This is perhaps in line with the idea that complex sounds are incomprehensible to most humans, and likely also impossible to pronounce by anyone other than experts such as [[:Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch|Gretchen]].

Another example of weird diacritics is in [[2619: Crêpe]], and with Zalgo text in [[1647: Diacritics]]. The use of typography to create psychological stress is explored in [[859: (]].

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

:[A diagram shows the extrusion of the trapezoidal IPA vowel chart upwards into three dimensions. A point near the center is labeled with an equation that shows "ə + ½√-1 " as being equivalent to a made-up symbol that looks like two schwas mirroring each other with other markings above and below.]

:[Below the diagram, a character with shoulder-length dark wavy hair pronounces the new vowel in a speech bubble with unstable lines surrounding it. Two bystanders to her right are bent over slightly, clutching their heads in apparent anguish.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Linguistics tip: Extend the IPA vowel plane along the imaginary axis to produce the ''complex vowels'', cursed sounds which the human mind cannot comprehend.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Tips]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch]]

2657: Complex Vowels

2022-08-12T19:38:21Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ sounds are produced

{{comic
| number = 2657
| date = August 10, 2022
| title = Complex Vowels
| image = complex_vowels.png
| titletext = Pronouncing [ṡṡċċḣḣẇẇȧȧ] is easy; you just say it like the 'x' in 'fire'.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a ROUNDED TONGUE. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[[File:Ipa-chart-vowels.png|thumb|200px|The standard IPA vowel chart.]]
This is another one of Randall's [[:Category:Tips|Tips]], this time a Linguistics Tip. The curly-haired linguist, [[:Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch|Gretchen McCulloch]], manages to produce a cursed sound using complex vowels, that cannot be comprehended by normal humans like [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]], who both seem to get a headache from listening to the sound. The sound she makes was produced by extending the IPA vowel plane along an imaginary axis to produce the complex vowels.

In phonetics based on the {{w|International Phonetic Alphabet}} (IPA), the space of {{w|vocal tract}} articulators determining {{w|vowel}}s  is represented as three dimensional, from the position of the tongue and lips. The vertical axis represents vowel height or ''closedness'' (i.e., how close or far the tongue is from the top of the mouth), and the horizontal axis represents front-to-back ''place'' (i.e., how close or far the top of the tongue is from the teeth.) The position of the tongue, along with the frequency of the {{w|vocal cords}} vibrating in the larynx from air being exhaled by the diaphragm, are the primary determinants of the fundamental and second {{w|formant}} frequencies of vowel sounds. A third dimension of vowel sounds is the "roundedness" of the lips, represented on the IPA vowel chart to the right by pairs of vowel phoneme {{w|glyph}}s. Other higher-dimensional vowel representations include {{w|diphthong}}s, which are simply two different sequential vowels slurred together; diphones, which represent the last half of one phoneme followed by the first half of the next; {{w|vowel shift}} mappings delineating different accents[https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/47086396.pdf][https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0095447010000562] and long-term evolution of voiced phone sounds; and {{w|cepstrum|cepstral}} representations such as {{w|Mel-frequency cepstrum|mel-frequency cepstral coefficients}}.

[[Randall]] suggests increasing the range of vowel sounds available by using complex notation to indicate an additional dimension with an "imaginary" axis. In mathematics, {{w|complex number}}s are numbers including both real numbers and {{w|imaginary number}}s. A complex number can be expressed as, "''a'' + ''b''i," where ''a'' and ''b'' are real numbers, but the latter imaginary part is combined with 'i,' the square root of negative one, as depicted in the central expression in the comic by √-̅1̅, indicating a further dimension of coordinates. When expanding the one-dimensional number line with an imaginary axis, it becomes two-dimensional with the "''b''i" component {{w|orthogonal}} to the original "real" number line. Linguists never use the {{w|complex plane}} to represent vowel roundedness or any other higher-dimensional features of phonemes, although the properties of complex numbers could conceivably support representing physiological features of the vocal tract, such as prior position of the articulators.{{cn}}

This comic conflates complex numbers in mathematics with "complex vowels" in linguistics. Such complex vowels are implied to create sounds which cannot be properly processed by the human brain, represented graphically as {{w|Zalgo text}} IPA, similarly to the cliché of "black speech" in {{w|Lovecraftian horror}}, a language created by alien beings with different vocal patterns than humans. In reality, people find Zalgo text amusing, thus the humor of the comic, but not particularly insanity-inducing or even more than mildly confusing.{{cn}} This is also funny because unadorned IPA shares some characteristics with Zalgo text, such as extremely uncommon glyphs and weird {{w|diacritics}}.

In linguistics, 'ə' is the {{w|schwa}} symbol, referred to in the title text and the depiction of complex phonemes, the most common vowel sound in English polysyllabic words (the 'a' in "comma" or the second 'e' in "letter.") Production of the schwa sound takes place with the tongue, jaw, and lips all in a relaxed, central position. The pronunciation of "[ṡṡċċḣḣẇẇȧȧ]" in the title text is said to sound like the x in the word fire. In fact, there is no x in fire. This is perhaps in line with the idea that complex sounds are incomprehensible to most humans, and likely also impossible to pronounce by anyone other than experts such as [[:Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch|Gretchen]].

Another example of weird diacritics is in [[2619: Crêpe]], and with Zalgo text in [[1647: Diacritics]]. The use of typography to create psychological stress is explored in [[859: (]].

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

:[A diagram shows the extrusion of the trapezoidal IPA vowel chart upwards into three dimensions. A point near the center is labeled with an equation that shows "ə + ½√-1 " as being equivalent to a made-up symbol that looks like two schwas mirroring each other with other markings above and below.]

:[Below the diagram, a character with shoulder-length dark wavy hair pronounces the new vowel in a speech bubble with unstable lines surrounding it. Two bystanders to her right are bent over slightly, clutching their heads in apparent anguish.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Linguistics tip: Extend the IPA vowel plane along the imaginary axis to produce the ''complex vowels'', cursed sounds which the human mind cannot comprehend.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Tips]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch]]

2657: Complex Vowels

2022-08-12T19:37:48Z

172.70.206.163: /* Explanation */ can't use a definite article for indefinite referrants

{{comic
| number = 2657
| date = August 10, 2022
| title = Complex Vowels
| image = complex_vowels.png
| titletext = Pronouncing [ṡṡċċḣḣẇẇȧȧ] is easy; you just say it like the 'x' in 'fire'.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a ROUNDED TONGUE. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[[File:Ipa-chart-vowels.png|thumb|200px|The standard IPA vowel chart.]]
This is another one of Randall's [[:Category:Tips|Tips]], this time a Linguistics Tip. The curly-haired linguist, [[:Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch|Gretchen McCulloch]], manages to produce a cursed sound using complex vowels, that cannot be comprehended by normal humans like [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]], who both seem to get a headache from listening to the sound. The sound she makes was accomplished by extending the IPA vowel plane along an imaginary axis to produce the complex vowels.

In phonetics based on the {{w|International Phonetic Alphabet}} (IPA), the space of {{w|vocal tract}} articulators determining {{w|vowel}}s  is represented as three dimensional, from the position of the tongue and lips. The vertical axis represents vowel height or ''closedness'' (i.e., how close or far the tongue is from the top of the mouth), and the horizontal axis represents front-to-back ''place'' (i.e., how close or far the top of the tongue is from the teeth.) The position of the tongue, along with the frequency of the {{w|vocal cords}} vibrating in the larynx from air being exhaled by the diaphragm, are the primary determinants of the fundamental and second {{w|formant}} frequencies of vowel sounds. A third dimension of vowel sounds is the "roundedness" of the lips, represented on the IPA vowel chart to the right by pairs of vowel phoneme {{w|glyph}}s. Other higher-dimensional vowel representations include {{w|diphthong}}s, which are simply two different sequential vowels slurred together; diphones, which represent the last half of one phoneme followed by the first half of the next; {{w|vowel shift}} mappings delineating different accents[https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/47086396.pdf][https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0095447010000562] and long-term evolution of voiced phone sounds; and {{w|cepstrum|cepstral}} representations such as {{w|Mel-frequency cepstrum|mel-frequency cepstral coefficients}}.

[[Randall]] suggests increasing the range of vowel sounds available by using complex notation to indicate an additional dimension with an "imaginary" axis. In mathematics, {{w|complex number}}s are numbers including both real numbers and {{w|imaginary number}}s. A complex number can be expressed as, "''a'' + ''b''i," where ''a'' and ''b'' are real numbers, but the latter imaginary part is combined with 'i,' the square root of negative one, as depicted in the central expression in the comic by √-̅1̅, indicating a further dimension of coordinates. When expanding the one-dimensional number line with an imaginary axis, it becomes two-dimensional with the "''b''i" component {{w|orthogonal}} to the original "real" number line. Linguists never use the {{w|complex plane}} to represent vowel roundedness or any other higher-dimensional features of phonemes, although the properties of complex numbers could conceivably support representing physiological features of the vocal tract, such as prior position of the articulators.{{cn}}

This comic conflates complex numbers in mathematics with "complex vowels" in linguistics. Such complex vowels are implied to create sounds which cannot be properly processed by the human brain, represented graphically as {{w|Zalgo text}} IPA, similarly to the cliché of "black speech" in {{w|Lovecraftian horror}}, a language created by alien beings with different vocal patterns than humans. In reality, people find Zalgo text amusing, thus the humor of the comic, but not particularly insanity-inducing or even more than mildly confusing.{{cn}} This is also funny because unadorned IPA shares some characteristics with Zalgo text, such as extremely uncommon glyphs and weird {{w|diacritics}}.

In linguistics, 'ə' is the {{w|schwa}} symbol, referred to in the title text and the depiction of complex phonemes, the most common vowel sound in English polysyllabic words (the 'a' in "comma" or the second 'e' in "letter.") Production of the schwa sound takes place with the tongue, jaw, and lips all in a relaxed, central position. The pronunciation of "[ṡṡċċḣḣẇẇȧȧ]" in the title text is said to sound like the x in the word fire. In fact, there is no x in fire. This is perhaps in line with the idea that complex sounds are incomprehensible to most humans, and likely also impossible to pronounce by anyone other than experts such as [[:Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch|Gretchen]].

Another example of weird diacritics is in [[2619: Crêpe]], and with Zalgo text in [[1647: Diacritics]]. The use of typography to create psychological stress is explored in [[859: (]].

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

:[A diagram shows the extrusion of the trapezoidal IPA vowel chart upwards into three dimensions. A point near the center is labeled with an equation that shows "ə + ½√-1 " as being equivalent to a made-up symbol that looks like two schwas mirroring each other with other markings above and below.]

:[Below the diagram, a character with shoulder-length dark wavy hair pronounces the new vowel in a speech bubble with unstable lines surrounding it. Two bystanders to her right are bent over slightly, clutching their heads in apparent anguish.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Linguistics tip: Extend the IPA vowel plane along the imaginary axis to produce the ''complex vowels'', cursed sounds which the human mind cannot comprehend.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Tips]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Gretchen McCulloch]]