explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3137: Cursed Number

2025-12-30T12:03:10Z

2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3137
| date = September 3, 2025
| title = Cursed Number
| image = cursed_number_2x.png
| imagesize = 388x449px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Another group of mathematicians is working to put an upper bound on the number, although everyone keeps begging them to stop.
}}

==Explanation==

It is quite common on mathematics to not know the value (or existence) of a number but be able to put bounds on it. For example, we know the first counterexample to the {{w|Collatz conjecture}} is at least 10^21, if it exists. There are also constants where we have an upper bound.

In this case, there is apparently postulated to exist a number that extremely harmful to the human mind to read it without eye protection - an {{w|information hazard}}. Dangerous pieces of writing like this are a fairly common trope in speculative fiction, such as the {{w|Necronomicon}} in the {{w|Cthulhu Mythos}}, [https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-033 cognitohazards] in the {{w|SCP Foundation}}, the Basilisk in {{w|BLIT_(short_story)|BLIT}} by David Langford, and {{w|Monty Python}}'s {{w|The Funniest Joke in the World|Funniest Joke in the World}}. It is also very similar to the concept of an {{w|illegal number}}, or the {{w|Number of the beast}}.

Saying that it is once ''again'' safe to view large random numbers without eye protection may imply that the cursed number used to not be cursed (as opposed to no one realizing that the cursed number existed). This might indicate an evolutionary change in human brain structure, or, [[2332: Cursed Chair|considering previous comics]], someone with magical powers literally placing a curse on it (but not telling humans which). In the latter case, the fact that mathematicians have been able to place a lower bound might suggest that the magic-wielder gave some sort of hint, such as a hashed or encrypted version or a mathematical puzzle/riddle. Alternatively it could be that after the existence of the cursed number was discovered, but before there was a lower bound on it, people were advised to wear eye protection when viewing any large number, because no one could be sure which large number was cursed. The mechanism by which the eye protection works is not explained; theoretically any eye protection which allowed someone to view the cursed number at all shouldn't work, as being able to see or read the number means you can perceive it.

Naturally, the mathematicians of this world are doing their best, in the interest of public safety, to keep this number away from as many human eyeballs as possible. Through some process they have figured out the number is at least 22 digits long. Numbers this large (greater than 1021, i.e. at least a {{w|Orders_of_magnitude_(numbers)#1021|'sextillion'}}) are extremely unlikely to be found in the day-to-day lives of non-mathematicians (and almost all mathematicians); even if a person spent their entire lives looking at random strings of 22 digit numbers flashing by every millisecond, for a 100 year lifetime, they would still only have about 3 in a (short) billion chance of seeing the number. Because of the low risk, public officials have deemed it safe for people to go about their daily lives reading numbers again without eye protection, which apparently protects you from the number.

Despite this, there are some instances of large numbers (more than 21 decimal digits) that may be encountered relatively frequently. IT professionals may encounter "{{w|Universally unique identifier}}s". These are 128 {{w|bit}} binary numbers requiring up to 39 decimal digits to display. However, with 2^128 possible possible numbers of that length, even if you look at UUIDs all day long you are extremely unlikely to see this "cursed number" if it exists.

In the title text another group of mathematicians are trying to narrow down the number's identity even further. The more attributes of the cursed number the mathematicians identify, the easier it is for someone with morbid curiosity or someone researching more attributes of the number to discover the number themselves and get their mind damaged. This includes the researchers themselves, as they are now willingly going above the lower safe limit, increasing their chances of encountering it accidentally. Furthermore, the cursed number may appear as part of another number; for example, 223 appears as part of 2237. Worse, if the number could be determined in some controllable way that didn't necessarily expose its discoverers, it {{w|BLIT (short story)|might be used as a weapon}}, and this might be easier with the upper bound discovered, if the method used to find the number is brute force. This echoes concerns about knowledge gained from research on nuclear forces having been used to create atomic weapons. This was also how the Funniest Joke in the World was used in Monty Python.

==Transcript==
:[A large screen with one equation in the middle is shown to the left of three people. The left part of the equation shows a black bar with a skull in the middle:]
: 💀 > 2.6 x 1021

:[Cueball is standing to the right of the screen and further right is Blondie. Blondie is standing behind a lectern with a label in front. Hairbun stands further and holds a paper up in front of her using both hands. The paper shows illegible text surrounding what is visibly the same equation as appears on the screen, with a skull, but not the black bar. None of the text can be read and the skull can only be made out as such, knowing what it is from the screen.]
:[The lectern reads:]
:Math Dept

:[Caption below the comic:]
:Good news: Mathematicians have put a new lower bound on the '''Cursed Number that destroys the minds of all who perceive it'''!
:It's at least 22 digits, which means it's unlikely to be seen by any human no matter how many random numbers they look at.
:They say it's once again safe to view large random numbers without eye protection.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Blondie]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Comics with cursed items]]

Talk:3131: Cesium

2025-12-30T08:27:53Z

2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3:

I think that's called a recipe for disaster. NOTE: I am also 104.225.172.143. [[Special:Contributions/138.43.101.123|138.43.101.123]] 14:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: No, ''I'' am 104.225.172.143! [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I'm 104.225.172.143, and so's my wife! [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 20:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:::I also chose this guy's wife. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1014:B130:F85B:54C8:CB88:DB33:11D0|2600:1014:B130:F85B:54C8:CB88:DB33:11D0]]

My best recipe comes with a Notice to Mariners [[User:Hcs|Hcs]] ([[User talk:Hcs|talk]]) 14:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I added a transcript. Hopefully it's okay. [[Special:Contributions/104.225.172.143|104.225.172.143]] 14:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

A gram of gold runs on the order of ~$100 USD as of writing; a gram of cs-137 looks to be in the millions~billions range. --[[Special:Contributions/158.91.163.9|158.91.163.9]] 14:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

: Nope. [https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2024/mcs2024-cesium.pdf It's 99 dollars]. [[Special:Contributions/191.57.16.100|191.57.16.100]] 20:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I think you're quoting the price for Caesium metal in general, which is probably almost entirely Caesium 133; Caesium 137 is a synthetic isotope which could easily be a million times more expensive than the natural stuff, gram for gram. [[Special:Contributions/80.41.70.128|80.41.70.128]] 22:37, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
::: You're right, my bad. I couldn't find a quote for Cs137, but considering it's produced from uranium, it probably is very expensive. As for the shrimp thing, I doubt anything close to a gram of Cesium ended up in the shipment. It's probably a component from a measuring device. [[Special:Contributions/177.12.48.45|177.12.48.45]] 09:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:Caesium contamination usually is caused by nuclear accidents (or atmospheric nuclear weapon tests) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137#Environmental_contamination. It is unlikely that someone acquired pure Cs-137 and then "accidentally" contaminated the shrimp with that. --[[Special:Contributions/134.102.219.31|134.102.219.31]] 15:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: Cs137 can be found for approximately 20 USD per µCi, which equals 0.0000000115g. That means 1g would cost 1,739,130,435 USD. The good news is that same gram would be worth 20 USD in another 795.7 years. Although it wouldn't be all Cs-137 anymore, nor exactly a gram. [[Special:Contributions/77.173.137.243|77.173.137.243]] 21:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
::So, what you're saying is... not a good investment for the future, with a 99.99999885ish% depreciation (''before'' any effects of monetary inflation), on top of me also having to become somewhere roughly around 8.5 centuries old. I suppose the latter ''might'' be a plus, if you can guarantee it, but it's not exactly a ringing endorsement for your scheme. ;) [[Special:Contributions/84.43.20.118|84.43.20.118]] 22:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Bothering the NSA shouldn't be hard, just write some of their secrets on a cake (with frosting is optional) and post it online. [[Special:Contributions/212.101.26.209|212.101.26.209]] 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: I feel like the writing on the cake is not part of its recipe. I think a more fitting way to get their attention would be "accidentally" poisoning the president with your cooking. --
[[Special:Contributions/128.31.34.92|128.31.34.92]] 22:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:If it gets worse, simply expressing disagreement with a certain person could get the NSA on your case. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 02:10, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

What would IMO do, revoke your math license? [[Special:Contributions/216.73.162.10|216.73.162.10]] 15:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: They have numerous penalties at their disposal. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: I imagined the reason the IMO would get involved would be because the recipe created some interesting mathematical problem that could be used for the next competition. For example, something like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct3lCfgJV_A this video], where a grocery order taken too literally creates a seemingly harmless Diophantine equation whose smallest positive solutions are on the order of 10^80. [[Special:Contributions/137.25.230.78|137.25.230.78]] 15:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: A cook on Air Force 1 "accidentally" contaminates Trump's fast food with cesium. The assassination attempt fails and US retaliates by invading Canada/Panama/Greenland (roll 1d3). IMO bans the US team, like they banned Russia in 2022. Thus a single cooking "accident" can get the attention of IAEA, IATA, IMO, and NSA. --[[Special:Contributions/128.31.34.92|128.31.34.92]] 22:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe The IATA could get involved if your ruined recipe caused food poisoning on a commercial airliner that then resulted in an in-air emergency (whole flight deck passed out). {{unsigned ip|170.85.70.249|17:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)}}
:Or if you create a column of dense toxic fumes that spreads over a wide area (on the level of a volcano eruption). On the other hand, I wonder what could bring the attention of the IMO when Terryology seemingly couldn't.--[[Special:Contributions/94.73.52.245|94.73.52.245]] 18:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The criticality accident in 1999 at the Tokaimura nuclear facility seems like a good example of messing up a recipe in a way that draws considerable attention. {{w|Tokaimura nuclear accidents}} [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B]] 19:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

1. Randall creates a new way to cook airplane food that is either cheap enough or expensive enough to significantly affect airline ticket pricing. 2. Randall's recipe poisons a Math Olympiad team. 3. The coach of the team turns out to be an undercover spy. [[Special:Contributions/24.53.184.90|24.53.184.90]] 23:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

{{w|IATA}} is an international trade association for airlines. It's not particularly involved in air safety, except as a sideline; the {{w|International Civil Aviation Organization}} is much more involved that way. However, IATA used to be directly concerned with recipes. In the 1950s, the IATA airlines agreed on international standards for meals, under which economy class passengers would only be provided with sandwiches. However, airlines such as SAS and Swissair provided their passengers with more and better sandwiches than U.S. airlines such as Pan Am and TWA were willing to provide. Eventually IATA issued a rule that sandwiches were to be cold, simple, unadorned, and inexpensive, feature “a substantial and visible” chunk of bread, and could not include materials normally regarded as expensive or luxurious, such as smoked salmon, oysters, caviar, lobster, game, asparagus, or pate de foie gras. Providing better sandwiches than those IATA allowed could result in a fine. (The rule was later revoked to allow economy class passengers to receive hot meals.) So at one point, it was possible to mess up a sandwich recipe by adding expensive ingredients that would incur the wrath of IATA. --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 00:43, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The explanation "... if the recipe is used in major airports, and the recipe is contaminated with a drug, the pilots that eat could experience vision loss or other problems, and if this recipe is widely used and normal people won't notice much besides minor side effects, then this could attract the attention of of the IATA" does not make sense. If a recipe caused vision loss when pilots ate the food, it would also cause vision loss for non-pilots. --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 00:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The phrase "messing up a recipe" means whatever Randall intended it to mean. The fact that some people may use the phrase to mean to make something at home does not mean that such a definition was intended by Randall. I don't think I have ever heard "messing up a recipe" mean anything other than ruining the preparation of the food. [[User:Inquirer|Inquirer]] ([[User talk:Inquirer|talk]]) 02:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:Someone who ''creates'' recipes could make a mistake, publish a bad recipe, and cause problems. If a recipe left food unsafe, for example: not cooked enough to kill bacteria, left at room temperature for an unsafe time, etc. Tell people to find wild mushrooms, and that the red mushrooms with white spots are extra tasty. :-) [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:37, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

:If Randall ever made a recipe for lava cake, one of the problems would how you keep it from melting the plate. [[Special:Contributions/107.77.205.64|107.77.205.64]] 18:23, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible this comic was inspired by the [https://www.fda.gov/food/alerts-advisories-safety-information/fda-advises-public-not-eat-sell-or-serve-certain-imported-frozen-shrimp-indonesian-firm recent FDA recall on certain Indonesian frozen shrimp]? [[Special:Contributions/174.21.93.112|174.21.93.112]] 03:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:That's noted, with that specific link, in the second sentence of the Explanation here. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
::Ack, apologies. I may be a little stupid. [[Special:Contributions/174.21.93.112|174.21.93.112]]

68 Bq/kg of Cs-137 is about 93 billions Cs-137 atoms in 1 kg of shrimp, that is about 1,5 picomole or 213 picograms. On the other hand one BED (banana equivalent dose) is ~15 Bq per piece, so eating a half pound package of this shrimp will irradiate you in the same amount as eating one banana, in terms of number of decays, but much less in terms of biological dose: potassium-40 in bananas emit beta radiation which is much more harmful when coming from ingested material than beta and gamma, roughly equally emitted by Cs-137. So this recall is on the level of emptying a reservoir after two guys pissed into it. Security theater. -- [[Special:Contributions/2620:1F7:2C04:7C44:0:0:31:3A|2620:1F7:2C04:7C44:0:0:31:3A]] 14:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
: Or the Dutch boy at the [deleted] dike. With the assault by Our ([https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2025/08/06/amoebas-lorica-meme-ories-68-introducing-humility/ USNA]) Government on such business-insensitive excesses as food safety, we should be grateful that the FDA is, at least for now, still capable of functioning at this level. [[Special:Contributions/2605:59C8:160:DB08:5C9D:407E:3E50:C822|2605:59C8:160:DB08:5C9D:407E:3E50:C822]] 15:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:The advisory does say that the danger is very low. I think this is one of those "abundance of caution" things. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I mean, you can't assume each individual shrimp was mixed with the same amount of cesium. Maybe some of it got a super dose and is actually harmful. Since the general public doesn't carry around geiger counters to restaurants, I say the recall is warranted.
::: Reminds me of the tale of [https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/n3sfi6/til_in_1911_physicist_george_de_hevesy_suspected/ George de Hevesy] who effectively ''did'' take a geiger counter to the (boarding house) dining table... But, then, he was suspecting that something would be found. Different times! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.60|82.132.236.60]] 15:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I think the fact that there is any cs137 in the shrimp at all is concerning. Where is it coming from? Did someone dump spent nuclear fuel near a fishery? How much and for how long? [[Special:Contributions/177.12.48.45|177.12.48.45]] 14:45, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
::: Not read the incident report, maybe it says there. But it's quite possible that some stage of processing uses a radiation source to scan the load of shrimp for unwanted debris (pass it under the emitter, if any significant bits of metal/dirt is in the supply, it'll cause a notable fluctuation in the detector beneath), ''or'' perhaps to asses the mass distribution (if the water content is enough to moderate the source-to-detector signal in a relatable manner, it could accurately estimate the quantity of shrimp passing by continuously, where weighing is less practical/accurate given the volume and continuous movement; ''or'' it might even track the average ''size'' of shrimp, for grading purposes). They do use small amounts of isotopes for that kind of thing. Amerecium is famouspy used in smoke-detectors/alarms, and other radionuclides (chosen for their particular mix of alpha/beta/gamma radiation, availability and sufficient half-life to match the product use-span.
::: Now imagine what if, perhaps ironically, the emitter capsule vibrated loose (or was dropped, in the midst of a swap-out of an 'old' one, and for some reason the person wldoing it didn't feel the need to emergency-stop the line) and got into the supply chain, either fragmenting or leaching out (as heat and cold, and perhaps mechanical pressures, further prepared the shrimp-load, now with added debris). [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.60|82.132.236.60]] 15:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Mooseberry fudge cake batter could very easily get the attention of the International Air Transport Association and possibly the NSA. As well as the Pottsylvania espionage community. [[User:Lordpishky|Lordpishky]] ([[User talk:Lordpishky|talk]]) 06:27, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Currently the explanation seems kind of centered on the idea that recipe only means a cooking recipe. "Recipe" used to mean to take, as in a prescription - a physician's instructions to a pharmacist/chemist. (This wiki entry recently said that recipe outside of cookery was a metaphor/extension - it isn't.) Recipe as cookery came later. If you look up recipe in the dictionary, cookery is just a special case.[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recipe Merriam Webster - recipe]

"Recipe - 1580s, "medical prescription, a formula for the composing of a remedy written by a physician," from French récipé (15c.), from Latin recipe "take!" (this or that ingredient), ... It was the word written by physicians at the head of prescriptions. Figurative meaning "a prescribed formula" is from 1640s. Meaning "instructions for preparing a particular food" is recorded by 1716." Rx is a holdover from Recipe.
[https://www.etymonline.com/word/recipe etymonline - recipe]

Cookery is only some of the every-day chemistry we do. Mixing chlorine bleach and various substances (ammonia, acids like vinegar, alcohol) can have nasty results.

Messing up a prescription, a chemical formula or chemical/nuclear ingredients is well within the literal definition of messing up a recipe, and gives more latitude for coming up with things that might draw attention from those organizations. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:98|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:98]] 18:10, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Sqround or tricylinder-shaped cakes or bread can attract the IMO's attention. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3|2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3]] 08:26, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3131: Cesium

2025-12-30T08:26:57Z

2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3: Squircle

I think that's called a recipe for disaster. NOTE: I am also 104.225.172.143. [[Special:Contributions/138.43.101.123|138.43.101.123]] 14:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: No, ''I'' am 104.225.172.143! [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I'm 104.225.172.143, and so's my wife! [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 20:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:::I also chose this guy's wife. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1014:B130:F85B:54C8:CB88:DB33:11D0|2600:1014:B130:F85B:54C8:CB88:DB33:11D0]]

My best recipe comes with a Notice to Mariners [[User:Hcs|Hcs]] ([[User talk:Hcs|talk]]) 14:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I added a transcript. Hopefully it's okay. [[Special:Contributions/104.225.172.143|104.225.172.143]] 14:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

A gram of gold runs on the order of ~$100 USD as of writing; a gram of cs-137 looks to be in the millions~billions range. --[[Special:Contributions/158.91.163.9|158.91.163.9]] 14:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

: Nope. [https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2024/mcs2024-cesium.pdf It's 99 dollars]. [[Special:Contributions/191.57.16.100|191.57.16.100]] 20:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I think you're quoting the price for Caesium metal in general, which is probably almost entirely Caesium 133; Caesium 137 is a synthetic isotope which could easily be a million times more expensive than the natural stuff, gram for gram. [[Special:Contributions/80.41.70.128|80.41.70.128]] 22:37, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
::: You're right, my bad. I couldn't find a quote for Cs137, but considering it's produced from uranium, it probably is very expensive. As for the shrimp thing, I doubt anything close to a gram of Cesium ended up in the shipment. It's probably a component from a measuring device. [[Special:Contributions/177.12.48.45|177.12.48.45]] 09:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:Caesium contamination usually is caused by nuclear accidents (or atmospheric nuclear weapon tests) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137#Environmental_contamination. It is unlikely that someone acquired pure Cs-137 and then "accidentally" contaminated the shrimp with that. --[[Special:Contributions/134.102.219.31|134.102.219.31]] 15:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: Cs137 can be found for approximately 20 USD per µCi, which equals 0.0000000115g. That means 1g would cost 1,739,130,435 USD. The good news is that same gram would be worth 20 USD in another 795.7 years. Although it wouldn't be all Cs-137 anymore, nor exactly a gram. [[Special:Contributions/77.173.137.243|77.173.137.243]] 21:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
::So, what you're saying is... not a good investment for the future, with a 99.99999885ish% depreciation (''before'' any effects of monetary inflation), on top of me also having to become somewhere roughly around 8.5 centuries old. I suppose the latter ''might'' be a plus, if you can guarantee it, but it's not exactly a ringing endorsement for your scheme. ;) [[Special:Contributions/84.43.20.118|84.43.20.118]] 22:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Bothering the NSA shouldn't be hard, just write some of their secrets on a cake (with frosting is optional) and post it online. [[Special:Contributions/212.101.26.209|212.101.26.209]] 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: I feel like the writing on the cake is not part of its recipe. I think a more fitting way to get their attention would be "accidentally" poisoning the president with your cooking. --
[[Special:Contributions/128.31.34.92|128.31.34.92]] 22:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:If it gets worse, simply expressing disagreement with a certain person could get the NSA on your case. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 02:10, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

What would IMO do, revoke your math license? [[Special:Contributions/216.73.162.10|216.73.162.10]] 15:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: They have numerous penalties at their disposal. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: I imagined the reason the IMO would get involved would be because the recipe created some interesting mathematical problem that could be used for the next competition. For example, something like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct3lCfgJV_A this video], where a grocery order taken too literally creates a seemingly harmless Diophantine equation whose smallest positive solutions are on the order of 10^80. [[Special:Contributions/137.25.230.78|137.25.230.78]] 15:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: A cook on Air Force 1 "accidentally" contaminates Trump's fast food with cesium. The assassination attempt fails and US retaliates by invading Canada/Panama/Greenland (roll 1d3). IMO bans the US team, like they banned Russia in 2022. Thus a single cooking "accident" can get the attention of IAEA, IATA, IMO, and NSA. --[[Special:Contributions/128.31.34.92|128.31.34.92]] 22:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe The IATA could get involved if your ruined recipe caused food poisoning on a commercial airliner that then resulted in an in-air emergency (whole flight deck passed out). {{unsigned ip|170.85.70.249|17:32, 20 August 2025 (UTC)}}
:Or if you create a column of dense toxic fumes that spreads over a wide area (on the level of a volcano eruption). On the other hand, I wonder what could bring the attention of the IMO when Terryology seemingly couldn't.--[[Special:Contributions/94.73.52.245|94.73.52.245]] 18:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The criticality accident in 1999 at the Tokaimura nuclear facility seems like a good example of messing up a recipe in a way that draws considerable attention. {{w|Tokaimura nuclear accidents}} [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B]] 19:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

1. Randall creates a new way to cook airplane food that is either cheap enough or expensive enough to significantly affect airline ticket pricing. 2. Randall's recipe poisons a Math Olympiad team. 3. The coach of the team turns out to be an undercover spy. [[Special:Contributions/24.53.184.90|24.53.184.90]] 23:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

{{w|IATA}} is an international trade association for airlines. It's not particularly involved in air safety, except as a sideline; the {{w|International Civil Aviation Organization}} is much more involved that way. However, IATA used to be directly concerned with recipes. In the 1950s, the IATA airlines agreed on international standards for meals, under which economy class passengers would only be provided with sandwiches. However, airlines such as SAS and Swissair provided their passengers with more and better sandwiches than U.S. airlines such as Pan Am and TWA were willing to provide. Eventually IATA issued a rule that sandwiches were to be cold, simple, unadorned, and inexpensive, feature “a substantial and visible” chunk of bread, and could not include materials normally regarded as expensive or luxurious, such as smoked salmon, oysters, caviar, lobster, game, asparagus, or pate de foie gras. Providing better sandwiches than those IATA allowed could result in a fine. (The rule was later revoked to allow economy class passengers to receive hot meals.) So at one point, it was possible to mess up a sandwich recipe by adding expensive ingredients that would incur the wrath of IATA. --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 00:43, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The explanation "... if the recipe is used in major airports, and the recipe is contaminated with a drug, the pilots that eat could experience vision loss or other problems, and if this recipe is widely used and normal people won't notice much besides minor side effects, then this could attract the attention of of the IATA" does not make sense. If a recipe caused vision loss when pilots ate the food, it would also cause vision loss for non-pilots. --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 00:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

The phrase "messing up a recipe" means whatever Randall intended it to mean. The fact that some people may use the phrase to mean to make something at home does not mean that such a definition was intended by Randall. I don't think I have ever heard "messing up a recipe" mean anything other than ruining the preparation of the food. [[User:Inquirer|Inquirer]] ([[User talk:Inquirer|talk]]) 02:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:Someone who ''creates'' recipes could make a mistake, publish a bad recipe, and cause problems. If a recipe left food unsafe, for example: not cooked enough to kill bacteria, left at room temperature for an unsafe time, etc. Tell people to find wild mushrooms, and that the red mushrooms with white spots are extra tasty. :-) [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:37, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

:If Randall ever made a recipe for lava cake, one of the problems would how you keep it from melting the plate. [[Special:Contributions/107.77.205.64|107.77.205.64]] 18:23, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible this comic was inspired by the [https://www.fda.gov/food/alerts-advisories-safety-information/fda-advises-public-not-eat-sell-or-serve-certain-imported-frozen-shrimp-indonesian-firm recent FDA recall on certain Indonesian frozen shrimp]? [[Special:Contributions/174.21.93.112|174.21.93.112]] 03:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:That's noted, with that specific link, in the second sentence of the Explanation here. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
::Ack, apologies. I may be a little stupid. [[Special:Contributions/174.21.93.112|174.21.93.112]]

68 Bq/kg of Cs-137 is about 93 billions Cs-137 atoms in 1 kg of shrimp, that is about 1,5 picomole or 213 picograms. On the other hand one BED (banana equivalent dose) is ~15 Bq per piece, so eating a half pound package of this shrimp will irradiate you in the same amount as eating one banana, in terms of number of decays, but much less in terms of biological dose: potassium-40 in bananas emit beta radiation which is much more harmful when coming from ingested material than beta and gamma, roughly equally emitted by Cs-137. So this recall is on the level of emptying a reservoir after two guys pissed into it. Security theater. -- [[Special:Contributions/2620:1F7:2C04:7C44:0:0:31:3A|2620:1F7:2C04:7C44:0:0:31:3A]] 14:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
: Or the Dutch boy at the [deleted] dike. With the assault by Our ([https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2025/08/06/amoebas-lorica-meme-ories-68-introducing-humility/ USNA]) Government on such business-insensitive excesses as food safety, we should be grateful that the FDA is, at least for now, still capable of functioning at this level. [[Special:Contributions/2605:59C8:160:DB08:5C9D:407E:3E50:C822|2605:59C8:160:DB08:5C9D:407E:3E50:C822]] 15:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
:The advisory does say that the danger is very low. I think this is one of those "abundance of caution" things. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I mean, you can't assume each individual shrimp was mixed with the same amount of cesium. Maybe some of it got a super dose and is actually harmful. Since the general public doesn't carry around geiger counters to restaurants, I say the recall is warranted.
::: Reminds me of the tale of [https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/n3sfi6/til_in_1911_physicist_george_de_hevesy_suspected/ George de Hevesy] who effectively ''did'' take a geiger counter to the (boarding house) dining table... But, then, he was suspecting that something would be found. Different times! [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.60|82.132.236.60]] 15:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I think the fact that there is any cs137 in the shrimp at all is concerning. Where is it coming from? Did someone dump spent nuclear fuel near a fishery? How much and for how long? [[Special:Contributions/177.12.48.45|177.12.48.45]] 14:45, 23 August 2025 (UTC)
::: Not read the incident report, maybe it says there. But it's quite possible that some stage of processing uses a radiation source to scan the load of shrimp for unwanted debris (pass it under the emitter, if any significant bits of metal/dirt is in the supply, it'll cause a notable fluctuation in the detector beneath), ''or'' perhaps to asses the mass distribution (if the water content is enough to moderate the source-to-detector signal in a relatable manner, it could accurately estimate the quantity of shrimp passing by continuously, where weighing is less practical/accurate given the volume and continuous movement; ''or'' it might even track the average ''size'' of shrimp, for grading purposes). They do use small amounts of isotopes for that kind of thing. Amerecium is famouspy used in smoke-detectors/alarms, and other radionuclides (chosen for their particular mix of alpha/beta/gamma radiation, availability and sufficient half-life to match the product use-span.
::: Now imagine what if, perhaps ironically, the emitter capsule vibrated loose (or was dropped, in the midst of a swap-out of an 'old' one, and for some reason the person wldoing it didn't feel the need to emergency-stop the line) and got into the supply chain, either fragmenting or leaching out (as heat and cold, and perhaps mechanical pressures, further prepared the shrimp-load, now with added debris). [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.60|82.132.236.60]] 15:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Mooseberry fudge cake batter could very easily get the attention of the International Air Transport Association and possibly the NSA. As well as the Pottsylvania espionage community. [[User:Lordpishky|Lordpishky]] ([[User talk:Lordpishky|talk]]) 06:27, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Currently the explanation seems kind of centered on the idea that recipe only means a cooking recipe. "Recipe" used to mean to take, as in a prescription - a physician's instructions to a pharmacist/chemist. (This wiki entry recently said that recipe outside of cookery was a metaphor/extension - it isn't.) Recipe as cookery came later. If you look up recipe in the dictionary, cookery is just a special case.[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recipe Merriam Webster - recipe]

"Recipe - 1580s, "medical prescription, a formula for the composing of a remedy written by a physician," from French récipé (15c.), from Latin recipe "take!" (this or that ingredient), ... It was the word written by physicians at the head of prescriptions. Figurative meaning "a prescribed formula" is from 1640s. Meaning "instructions for preparing a particular food" is recorded by 1716." Rx is a holdover from Recipe.
[https://www.etymonline.com/word/recipe etymonline - recipe]

Cookery is only some of the every-day chemistry we do. Mixing chlorine bleach and various substances (ammonia, acids like vinegar, alcohol) can have nasty results.

Messing up a prescription, a chemical formula or chemical/nuclear ingredients is well within the literal definition of messing up a recipe, and gives more latitude for coming up with things that might draw attention from those organizations. [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:98|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:98]] 18:10, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Sqround cakes can attract the IMO's attention. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3|2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3]] 08:26, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3143: Question Mark

2025-12-30T08:21:24Z

2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3: Judgement period

Surely it should read CharlieApostraphe’s Angels, right? [[User:KelOfTheStars!|KelOfTheStars!]] ([[User talk:KelOfTheStars!|talk]]) 02:30, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:You apostrophe re almast right period. tilde tilde tilde tilde [[Special:Contributions/2607:FB91:7914:D333:3D03:FB75:B160:75F4|2607:FB91:7914:D333:3D03:FB75:B160:75F4]] 03:08, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
::You still have to put the punctuation mark after the word open parenthesis (in this case comma, the apostrophe end parenthesis) btw period. tilde tilde tilde tilde [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 03:20, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Someone should do a grammar tag or whatever comma, like the citation needed tag comma, that links to this comic period. tilde tilde tilde tilde [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 03:20, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

guys (sorry first time commenting so i know that this is formatted wrong) can we not put the names of the formatting in the discription? i literally came to this page to try to figure out what the titletext was trying to say, only to find just as much (if not more) confusion on a page that was meant to remove confusion.
:Seconded, as fun as it probably is, it's also incredibly difficult to follow. [[Special:Contributions/2601:681:A80:F890:E8FF:E5A3:E698:22CF|2601:681:A80:F890:E8FF:E5A3:E698:22CF]] 04:38, 18 September 2025 (UTC)Bthardamz
:Mhm period. Save the flavored text for titles and the comment section period. very difficult to read ellipsis... tilde tilde tilde tilde [[Special:Contributions/2605:59C8:22F0:3310:1EB6:FF4:46E:74F5|2605:59C8:22F0:3310:1EB6:FF4:46E:74F5]] 04:49, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:Even if we decide to keep it in the explanation comma, it definitely shouldn't be in the transcript period. tilde tilde tilde tilde [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 05:33, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:that's entirely fair comma, I got the idea to match the explanation formatting with the comic content from [[1285: Third Way]] comma, though in that instance it's way less obtrusive period. tilde tilde tilde tilde [[Special:Contributions/137.25.230.78|137.25.230.78]] 07:30, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
: thirding the above. if i'm on this site it's so i can understand the parts of the comic that confused me. the current formatting is directly hostile to that goal. [[Special:Contributions/2600:6C64:64F0:8470:85E0:2F90:F707:90A8|2600:6C64:64F0:8470:85E0:2F90:F707:90A8]] 04:42, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
: How about a compromise solution of putting the punctuation labels in small print? Something like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Small&action=edit this] should work, though it was being screwy when I tested in the preview here: example [[User:Solomon|Solomon]] ([[User talk:Solomon|talk]]) 05:46, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:P.S. On my phone, it seems to only work in Desktop Mode, so maybe it's a problem with the CSS for the mobile layout? [[User:Solomon|Solomon]] ([[User talk:Solomon|talk]]) 05:48, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

... This is a thing people do? Glad to be unfamiliar. [[Special:Contributions/52.213.77.206|52.213.77.206]] 07:27, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:I did this just yesterday; a cat was laying on my hands, and I could type "query" but not shift-questionmark. [[Special:Contributions/47.145.254.54|47.145.254.54]] 22:45, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

This becomes an annoyingly common occurrence if you commonly use speech to text programs. It is not very fun in regular conversation [[Special:Contributions/99.2.109.131|99.2.109.131]] 12:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Instances in Media: In the Amazing World of Gumball episode "The Line", Gumball refers to "Stellar Odyssey Colon The Force Rehashed". [[User:Vandof|Vandof]] ([[User talk:Vandof|talk]]) 04:11, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:Not really relevant to this website (we're not cataloging these outside of xkcd), but have you seen ''Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film For Theaters Colon The Soundtrack''? [[Special:Contributions/24.177.125.170|24.177.125.170]] 08:05, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

This is a thing my friend group can't stop saying, and i thought it was just us. neat! --[[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Use of that joke in the transcript section - afaik transcript is more or less an accessibility feature. Doing the spelling-out-every-punctuation thing makes the transcript significantly difficult to read, and also it confuses what is a part of the original text and what is a spelled-out punctuation you added. I'm not in favor of having the joke in the transcript section. [[User:User670|User670]] ([[User talk:User670|talk]]) 09:49, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
:Yeah, this is absolutely not the place for it. --[[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 13:00, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

The italics section is explicitly opened with the word "italics". Shouldn't it be closed? Or is that implicit in the paragraph break? I'm uncertain if the "Period. Paragraph break." should also be italicized, or if they should be exempt because they're punctuation and formatting indicators. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 16:17, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Interesting reaction on Randall's (Cueball's) part. When people do that, it makes ''me'' want to poke them in the eye. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 17:00, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Can anyone analyse the spacing between words in the main comic? Is there unusual spacing in Cueball's speech or the caption, compared with Hairy's sentence? [[Special:Contributions/86.8.84.104|86.8.84.104]] 00:40, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

All this discussion about verbal punctuation, and no mention of Victor Borge? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPc0aijY2o4 [[Special:Contributions/185.219.141.117|185.219.141.117]] 02:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)
:I added a link to one of those clips fairly early on, but it got deleted. That might have been because I tried to incorporate the weird sounds in the write-up. I put it back, minus the weird sounds. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:42, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

The gag with the read-alound punctuation was also used about 40 years ago in a sketch in the German Fastnacht classic "Mainz bleibt Mainz" show. (Warning: Anyone commenting about German humor will get their flipperwald gersputet.) [[Special:Contributions/2A02:2455:1960:4000:151C:FD75:4E37:3F6D|2A02:2455:1960:4000:151C:FD75:4E37:3F6D]] 08:03, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be more on the selection of ''Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle'' as the example of taste for the semi-punchline. I, like Hairy, would put it among the greatest films of all time, but Cueball seems to disagree, and I suspect other jokes in the history of the internet may have referred to it with the same sentiment... [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 08:26, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
*May All Time Question Mark be the author(s) of the film?
*Judgement period sounds like a time during which one judges (e. g. as part of a jury), or an interpretation of Judgement Day where it is not necessarily 1 day (86,400 or 86,401 seconds).
[[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3|2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3]] 08:21, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Talk:1285: Third Way

2025-12-29T10:07:58Z

2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3:

I think the article should explain the 'typewriter story' mentioned in the title text. [[User:Ollieollieoxenfree|Ollieollieoxenfree]] ([[User talk:Ollieollieoxenfree|talk]]) 04:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm wondering if the title text refers to the habbit many people have of slamming on their space key creating a very load sound- hence you can hear the difference between one space and two. But I'm not confident enough to edit the page [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.97|173.245.52.97]] 19:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

One line per sentence is reminiscent of a diagrammed/formal logic argument in philosophy. It would be a much more effective convention to help people parse and interpret content and validity of e.g. political claims. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.63.198|173.245.63.198]] 17:21, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Line break after every sentence. 
Because I can. 
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.7|108.162.245.7]] 04:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

ONE SPACE AFTER A PERIOD. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:MY VOTE TOO!!! --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:MY VOTE, TWO!!! (not really) [[User:Orazor|Orazor]] ([[User talk:Orazor|talk]]) 09:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
:1 space makes writing 1‰ to 1% faster, depending on sentence length. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3|2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3]] 10:07, 29 December 2025 (UTC)
Writing plaintext, I always do two spaces after a sentence ending period.
This is probably because I did in fact start typing on a real typewriter.
In an environment where automatic formatting will take place, like a web page or wiki text, I use the newline.
I have had people in this wiki collapse my multiple line forms to one of the others.
(I was disappointed.)
--[[User:Divad27182|Divad27182]] ([[User talk:Divad27182|talk]]) 04:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I prefer double spacing, but I used single spacing in writing the explanation, just to make people happy. Perhaps I should have used new lines. [[User:Concomitant|Concomitant]] ([[User talk:Concomitant|talk]]) 05:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
: I'm a double-spacer too. Am I wrong? I can't break myself of the habit, I even do it in tweets! --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:43, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The 'third way' is a little underappreciated here: it divides the text into self contained logical units, and makes text processing tools (grep, diff etc.) much more usable.
Proper text rendering engines (TeX, HTML, etc.) already make this assumption and group sentences accordingly.
If only I realized this earlier, it would have made my thesis revisions much more easier.
In fact, up to this moment, I thought I was that lone guy in the comic.
EDIT: this comment in xkcd forums makes my point clear: http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=106217#p3489055
--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.11|141.101.96.11]] 05:42, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

:As a programmer, I find nothing weird in adapting your style to language. Writing two spaces in HTML or TeX is useless, as they won't render as two spaces anyway. (While using for this purpose nonbreakable spaces, which would render, is a crime.) -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 10:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
::It would also render incorrectly if the period was close to the end of a line. If the markup is [last word of sentence][period][nbsp][space][next sentence], the last word of the first sentence could end up on the next line unnecessarily. But if it's [last word of sentence][period][space][nbsp][next sentence], the next line of text would start with a space, which is much worse.--[[User:Rael|Rael]] ([[User talk:Rael|talk]]) 15:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

::I end my sentences with a line break, a % and another linebreak. Only after commata etc i use a single line break. Oh, and don't forget to protect the space after points used in abbreviations, not as full stops, by a backslash. Most TeX increase the length of the space after a full stop a bit. Bit question: Why don't double space people, when using Word not just use a longer space instead of a double space. Noone would have the idea to indent a paragraph or substitute a tab with a series of spaces.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.117|108.162.242.117]] 03:11, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:::Because the keyboard does not contain a longer space key.--[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.188|173.245.52.188]] 18:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I always just find and replace double space with single space. If formatting suffers, someone did a bad job.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.228|108.162.231.228]] 06:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Synthetica

I always just find and replace single space with double space. If formatting suffers, someone did a bad job.--[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.188|173.245.52.188]] 18:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

So, why did double spacing after a period ever exist? It doesn't seem necessary. [[User:PheagleAdler|PheagleAdler]] ([[User talk:PheagleAdler|talk]]) 07:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:Here's the standard explanation: on typewriters, each character takes up the same amount of space. So a lower-case "i" takes up the same amount of space as a capital "M". This is called a monospace font. When typing, if you just put a single space after the end of period ending a sentence, the reader doesn't necessarily get the sense that a new sentence has started. This is particularly true if you were typing in all caps, as might be common on some types of forms or documents. Two spaces, however, does the job nicely. In theory, with modern proportional-width fonts, this is unnecessary. [[User:Rylon|Rylon]] ([[User talk:Rylon|talk]]) 23:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
::Here's the researched explanation: http://www.heracliteanriver.com/?p=324 So technically, an em-space after a period, an en-space after a comma. Or you know, whatever you want. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.161|108.162.250.161]] 06:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

even though i learned typing on a typewriter, to this day i had never heard of the double space thing. maybe it's a US only thing, like the stupid french with spaces BEFORE punctuation marks. [[User:Peter|Peter]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 07:54, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:I've always taken the double-space thing as a US thing. Some editors like emacs default to it, which is really annoying. That said, as a frenchman, the "space before punctuation" is normal to me and it is part of the ''codified'' typography -- and I think this is actually an important distinction to make. Is this double-space vs single-space something codified somehow? As a last word, I need to be nitpicky: the exact French typography rule is "a space before punctuation made of two parts (namely colon, semi-colon, exclamation/question mark) and no space before punctuation made of a single part (dots, commas.)" It's a very deterministic rule that is easy to apply (whether one agrees to it or not.) [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 16:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
::This is a common question from the French and some other nationals. The answer is that English does not work that way. There is no official codified version. The most you have is small pockets of codification within an organization, such as The University of Boulder, or UPI or the US Army. If you're working in or with such an organization you should use their standard. If you try to extend any such standard to the rest of the world you are a nasty egomanical control freak who should be chopped into pieces and fed to the fishes.--[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.188|173.245.52.188]] 18:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

As a german typographer I have to say I’m ''shocked''! ''Two'' spaces per period? A space ''before'' punctuation?! My scientific opinion: you all are completely crazy ;-) (Just kidding, but seriously, two spaces? In Germany, the first possibility to do that safely is your last will …) [[User:Quoti|Quoti]] ([[User talk:Quoti|talk]]) 10:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The doubled spaces appear in my browser's tooltips. (Maybe someone should add some non breaking spaces to the quotation of the tooltip text?) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.236|141.101.98.236]] 10:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

As a(n automatic) two-spacer person (just you watch, I'll use 'em here, despite it obviously not being rendered), it's just what I learnt, back in the '70s, here in the UK. I've no idea ''why'' I learnt it. However, it may stem from the same root as the 'rule' in handwriting (not biros, but nibbed pens dipped in ink... wow, I feel old, but it ''was'' at primary school) that we use a gap as big as our our (very little) little-fingers to separate sentences. I imagine differentiating full-stops (US: periods) from commas in the messy medium of ink might be a valuable visual indicator as to what a given smudge might ''actually'' be. So, anyway, double-spacing. On the other hand I should report that, "I've dropped the habit it of appropriate punctuation prior to quotes," I say, "despite being the way I learnt it." And instead I will drop "<- Commas from that sort of position," you see, "even through I'll keep the ones that are semantic pauses." You see how my standards are slipping? Anyway, good comic. We now return you to your regularly-scheduled programme.  [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.214|141.101.98.214]] 14:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

:I'm in the same boat this this bloke. I don't get the typewriter tie in. I seem to recall being taught to use a finger gage correct gap of whitespace to leave between the end of one sentence and the beginning of the next. This was in an American small town southern school in the early 1980s. I assume it was for readability. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.236.25|108.162.236.25]] 16:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The "third way" is used for articles on the [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news BBC News] website :-) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.233|141.101.99.233]] 14:52, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:Actually, they put each sentence into a paragraph of its own, which is yet different. (In HTML: <code>... .</code> vs. <code>... . </code>) --[[User:Das-g|Das-g]] ([[User talk:Das-g|talk]]) 16:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:That's what I came here to say, that the Third Way is common-place on the web today, it is the tabloid style. This headline article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24775846 off the BBC right now only has full-stops (periods in en-US) before paragraph breaks, apart from quotations (ie what the BBC did not write). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.229|141.101.98.229]] 16:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:The BBC is not the only web site to do that - and it is '''so''' annoying. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.222.244|108.162.222.244]] 10:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

There's a FOURTH way! I receive a "Weekly Update from Senator Tim Scott" HTML formatted email about once a week (unsurprisingly) which, in lieu of spaces between words, uses a carriage return and a linefeed. This alleviates the question of how many spaces between sentences completely! It also renders as oneverylongword in my email client. Ie: <blockquote>Thankyouforsubscribingtomye-newsletter.</blockquote> [[Special:Contributions/108.162.236.25|108.162.236.25]] 16:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
: And a fifth: In France, they use one whitespace before and after double punctions (:;?!) but only one whitespace after single punctuation (.,). --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.79.25|141.101.79.25]] 20:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the finger space was to help kids create clear separation while developing their proficiency at penmanship.
I think the 2x space is a fall out from the fixed width formatting of typewriters to help assist the reader (or proof reader) with the start and end of a sentence.
Double spacing has almost become OCD for me. I can't help it. Of course I also leave paragraph marks on while I type as well. I wonder if the French would require a space before a double quote, "The author ponders. "

I think we could improve old school cryptography if we just used carriage returns and ignored the 'new' line.
I might be able to accept and adopt the single space rule if I can make my spaces default to twice the point size of every other character in the style.
[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.186|199.27.128.186]] 19:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
:FOROL DSCHO OLCRY PTOGR APHYT AKEYO URCUE FROME NIGMA DECOD ESAND ARRAN GEEVE RYTHI NGING ROUPS OFFIV EWITH OUT''AN Y''PUNC TUAT IONAN DINAL LCAPS  [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.214|141.101.98.214]] 01:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I have my word processor set to a a gap equal to one and a half spaces after a sentence ends[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.198|173.245.52.198]] 19:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

New paragraph (TWO line brakes) after every sentence :-) --[[User:Sten|Sten]] ([[User talk:Sten|talk]]) 20:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I love how the explanation uses the third method. Nice touch. [[User:JRDeBo|JRDeBo]] ([[User talk:JRDeBo|talk]]) 23:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone think there's any significance to the sword and the spear? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.208.144|108.162.208.144]] 23:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, because this is a SERIOUS ISSUE. [[User:Alpha|Alpha]] ([[User talk:Alpha|talk]]) 06:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
:A sword has a longer blade, while a spear keeps people further away. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.210|108.162.219.210]] 12:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

According to the [[http://fireemblemwiki.org/Weapon_triangle Fire Emblem weapon triangle]], the 1-spacers win against the 2-spacers. Then again, I put one space after each sentence. [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 18:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Picture of a cat after every full stop !!! {{unsigned ip|173.245.51.221}}

With all the whitespace compression and variable width fonts in modern technology switching back to 2-space is as viable as switching over to localized Programmer Dvorak. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.18|108.162.231.18]] 13:44, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey, does anyone know if there's any way to make the wiki keep two spaces in a row, so the title text shows up properly? [[User:SuperSupermario24|Just some random derp]] 15:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I was mildly confused about the weird phrasing of "This comic refers to the dance-off occurring ..." I already forgot my browser plugin that I've installed an hour ago. I think its great that it happened on a xkcd-related site. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.22|141.101.92.22]] 12:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not from the US so I never actually heard about a rule with two spaces. From my point of view the rule is stupid, really dumb. Just let go of it! There is no reason for it. My brain starts to spasm when I hear about a rule of two spaces after a period. Ungh!! {{unsigned ip|162.158.86.113}}

The 2 spaces used in (early) PCs and TypeWriters (and TTYs) could be caused by the too little difference between a «.» and a «,» with little fonts on CRTs (''320*200px with 8*8px single letter with <16" monitors with a signal trought an RF cable, for a C64''), dot-printers (''like 60*75 dpi (h*v), 9*9 per character, for an Epson MX-80'') and typewritten sheets (''maybe with dirty sort/type'')?
[The examples in parentheses are for a mid-level-case, because there are worst monitors and standards than those, see previous comments]
''Nickh''²+, [[Special:Contributions/188.114.103.166|188.114.103.166]] 00:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC) .

Well, looks like the one-spacers will win due to the weapon triangle. After all, lances best swords. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.64|172.68.174.64]] 16:54, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
:Do line breakers count as axes or staves? [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I just realized that there's a line break after ever sentence in this article.
(Insert formatting here)
:It’s four tildes (~ Those guys) to sign your comment. [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I have an easy solution to the debate.
Just press the TAB key after each sentence (doesn't work here, because of editing reasons).

google docs actually enforces the one space style for capitalization.

Is it just me, or is the wiki intentionally using the third way? (I'm a one-spacer. See?
:WHy did you not close the bracket :( [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 10:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
::You opened another parenthesie! ):) --{{User:PoolloverNathan/Signature}} 18:33, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
0 spaces after a period.yes.[[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:01, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Interesting…I was always told that after an abbreviation like Mr. or Mrs. within a sentence, you were supposed to use a single space, and then after a sentence you would double space. Thus you would always have a clear visual indicator of whether a period was indicating an abbreviation or an end of sentence. Makes total sense, is entirely consistent, just like that weird French rule about spacing before double punctuation. Truly, has no one else here heard of this? Thatʼs why Iʼm inclined (prior to doing any research) to be in full agreement with the protestor saying that the monospaced font myth is totally made up. That being said, I also see it as a complete and total waste of good programming on the part of whoever it was who even bothered to cause HTML, et al to reduce extra whitespace in the first place! Imho, it should never have even occurred to them to write those lines of code at all. People should be free to write their whitespace exactly the way they want it and have it stay that way, without some web browser daring to presume that it knows the correct formatting better than the user does. smh lol
[[User:Heleatunda|Heleatunda]] ([[User talk:Heleatunda|talk]]) 06:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
:With the decline of "Mrs. Brown" compared with "Mrs Brown" (and initialisms not being dotted, all along; so not "N.A.S.A." but "NASA", and then examples like this even reduced to "Nasa"), the imperative to disambiguate isn't there. I was taught to ''write'' with more space (a little finger's-worth, when my little finger was much littler than today), for readability or even easy checking that there weren't any horribly-long run-on sentences.
:I'd carry that on into <dot><space><space> when typing (and word-processing), but it is one of the 'rules' that I've felt unnecessary (or even not useful) to maintain after entering the online ecosystem (pre-HTML) and seeing how many perfectly legible but varied typing styles there actually were out there. Even from such benighted lands such as the rebellious former colonies, which I'll admit have introduced me to many small changes to my British styling, and occasionally even spelling (though I'm still solidly an "-our" suffix person, "metre" for length and will continue to go with "-ise"/"-yse", as I see fit, etc). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.218|172.70.85.218]] 09:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

2809: Moon

2025-12-29T10:03:10Z

2001:4C4E:1C11:B800:34F9:178:1B57:97B3: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2809
| date = July 31, 2023
| title = Moon
| image = moon_2x.png
| imagesize = 313x402px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I mean, it's pretty, but it doesn't really affect us beyond that. Except that half the nights aren't really dark, and once or twice a day it makes the oceans flood the coasts.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|Moon}} is a celestial body orbiting Earth, first formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago - about 50 million years after the initial formation of the solar system. As of the date of this comic, the Moon is still orbiting the Earth{{Citation needed}} at an average distance of approximately 384,400 kilometers, or about 238,900 miles.

This comic points out how weird it is to have such an enormous celestial body near to us. The Moon has a radius more than one quarter of Earth's, and is around one eightieth of Earth's mass, and is so close that major surface features are visible, even with the naked eye, and much more clearly visible with even a simple telescope. Celestial distances tend to be so large that only truly immense objects can be seen without magnification, and even those tend to appear only as points of light to the naked eye. The second nearest body of notable size, Venus, is approximately 46.576 million kilometers away at its closest. The fact that there's "another world" that's close enough that humanity has always been aware of it, but distant enough that it couldn't be reached until a space program was developed, is a striking feature of Earth that we take for granted, only because it's always been that way.

While it's not uncommon for planets to have orbiting moons, no other planet in the solar system has a moon that's so large, in relation to the planet. Of the other rocky planets, only Mars has moons, and the largest of those is only 14 miles across.

Pluto and Charon are closer in size, than even the Earth/Moon system, but this meant that they had actually become seriously considered as a {{w|Double planet|double(/binary) planet pair}}, had not Pluto been redesignated as a "dwarf planet". There is the possibility a term such as "double dwarf planet" could be adopted, at some point, as "double minor planet" is sometimes already used for binary asteroid systems. The lesser bodies of the Pluto-Charon system may then even be considered as circumbinary moons.

Other than this, Earth is the only accepted planet we're currently aware of that has a satellite that's so visible from its surface.

The title text sarcastically claims that, other than being "pretty", the Moon doesn't impact us, then subverts it by mentioning substantial impacts it has on Earth. Having such a large satellite so close has impacts that we take for granted only because we're used to them, but if they hadn't always existed, they'd seem unbelievable. One is that, for half the lunar cycle, the moon reflects enough light to produce visibility at night. The other impact is tides, since the gravitational pull of the Moon is large enough to alter the surfaces of oceans, causing shorelines to shift on a daily cycle. The text mentions these dismissively, in a deliberate contrast with their huge significance. Moonlight alters the illumination cycle of the planet to a significant degree, which changes how both humans and other animals operate at night, especially before the advent of artificial lighting. Tides had major impacts on the development of life, continue to affect ecosystems, and play an essential role in our ability to interact with the oceans. If someone from a planet without such a large moon were to observe these impacts, they'd likely be shocked and amazed by them, but we barely notice them.

The comic [[3135: Sea Level]] is very similar to this one, but it starts with noting how strange and SciFi the tides on Earth are.

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail is pointing and looking up to the left, while Cueball behind her looks the same way.]
:Ponytail: That thing hanging in the sky is a second nearby world. It's close enough that you can see its surface as it passes overhead.
:Cueball: Wow. Isn't that ... weird?
:Ponytail: I dunno, it's just always been there.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:If it didn't exist, the moon would sound like such an outlandish sci-fi concept.

==Trivia==
*Earth's moon can be considered weird for additional reasons.
**It is by far the largest and most massive moon relative to the planet it orbits.
**Our moon is the only moon in the solar system to not have a proper name, not even a jumble of letters and numbers. In English it is simply given the proper name of "the Moon" (capitalized), being the ancient archetype for all other moons discovered since the time of Galileo, although it can also be described by other titles such as "Luna" (directly taken from from Latin mythology/astronomy).
**It is almost exactly the same apparent size as the Sun in the sky which at various times enables both total solar eclipses (for which it needs to be close/large) and annular ones (for which it must not be ''too'' close/large). Much earlier in history it was too close to do both and much later it will gradually drift too far away to do so – making it additionally a temporal coincidence that humanity gets to witness it as we are so used to seeing it.
**There are even a couple of hypotheses that think that to get protein shaped right for life, the tides were needed, and that to evolve for living on land the tides are needed.
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]