explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2656: Scientific Field Prefixes

2022-08-10T23:38:31Z

Aethelred: /* Table with explanations */

{{comic
| number = 2656
| date = August 8, 2022
| title = Scientific Field Prefixes
| image = scientific_field_prefixes.png
| titletext = Massage: Theoretical (10), Quantum (6), High-energy (2), Computational (1), Marine (1), Astro- (None)
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Quantum Dentist - Fill in this [[#Table with explanations|table with explanations]]. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
{{w|Google Scholar}} is a search engine for academic publications, and [[Randall]] has been having fun with it.

Randall searches for various terms that are composed of some common prefixes and common suffixes, but not always commonly associated with each other in each possible combination, and tabulates the results. See this [[#Table with numbers|table with numbers]] for easy overview.

This reveals some very commonly used full terms like "{{w|Theoretical Physics}}", the most discovered, which represents almost four million hits compared to the next highest, "{{w|Computational Biology}}", with almost 3 million hits and {{w|Astrophysics}} with 2 million hits. Ducking just below 1 million hits is fourth placing {{w|Marine Biology}}. Of the 42 possible fields just 14 have more than 100,000 hits, and only four more have over 10,000.

But there are also some that have much lower numbers, eight with fewer than 10 hits in the table. "High-Energy Psychology" and "Marine Dentistry" have just one apparent occurrence each (equivalent to a {{w|Googlewhack}}), whilst there are no hits at all recorded for four of the initially combined terms. In total (with the title text) there are 48 fields, see a full [[#List of Scientific fields|list of scientific fields]] below.

An explanation for both existing and fictive scientific fields can be given below in the [[#Table with explanations|table with explanations]].

In the caption to the table Randall list four potential research opportunities i.e. those with no hits in the table: Quantum Dentistry, High-Energy Dentistry, Astrodentistry, and High-Energy Theology

He thus suggests that, because of the (apparent) lack of current studies in these specialized sub-fields, there may be unexplored potential for a study. This could be that the more "used" areas have far too much competition and be might already be "used up" for potentially useful discoveries. (This does not account for how much 'study space' might be available in a given box of research, even though Randall has previously hinted that anything "Astro"-related is potentially [[2640: The Universe by Scientific Field|full of many things to study]].)
Of course the real reason for no one studying these fields are that they make no sense. {{w|Dentistry}} is related to fixing peoples teeth. The quantum world has no effect on humans teeth{{Citation needed}}, and high-energy inside a humans mouth may also be a bit dangerous (although x-rays and radiation treatment in the mouth could be seen as high energy.) Astrodentistry is not really relevant if seeing this as something used on humans. Of course astronauts might need dentistry while in space, but it would be a stretch to call the study of dentistry in zero-G for astrodentistry. High-energy Theology seems more like someone could have used the word...

In the title text Randall lists the figures for another 'major' field suffix, i.e. {{w|Massage}}, and the numbers of its prefixed forms. From this, we learn that Astromassage is another 'open' field that is currently unstudied, but none of the five others have more than 10. Actually the most surprising aspect of the title text is that there are hits for both quantum massage and high-energy massage... Massage has been added to the tables below and the list of fields.

===Table with numbers===
*Here the table is presented with only numbers, so it can be sorted.
**Massage from the title text has been added.
{|class="wikitable sortable"
!
! Physics
! Chemistry
! Biology
! Engineering
! Psychology
! Theology
! Dentistry
! Massage
|-
| Theoretical
| 3990000
| 445000
| 553000
| 2460
| 15500
| 726
| 41
| 10
|-
| Quantum
| 478000
| 740000
| 7620
| 21100
| 699
| 447
| 0
| 6
|-
| High-Energy
| 844000
| 9600
| 3
| 119
| 1
| 0
| 0
| 2
|-
| Computational
| 510000
| 599000
| 2910000
| 67400
| 4620
| 40
| 11
| 1
|-
| Marine
| 3920
| 136000
| 945000
| 108000
| 35
| 6
| 1
| 1
|-
| Astro-
| 2010000
| 20600
| 226000
| 430
| 64
| 580
| 0
| 0
|}

===List of Scientific fields===
This is included for easy reading of the numbers:
*Theoretical Physics: 3,990,000
*Theoretical Chemistry: 445,000
*Theoretical Biology: 553,000
*Theoretical Engineering: 2,460
*Theoretical Psychology: 15,500
*Theoretical Theology: 726
*Theoretical Dentistry: 41
*Theoretical Massage: 10
*Quantum Physics: 478,000
*Quantum Chemistry: 740,000
*Quantum Biology: 7,620
*Quantum Engineering: 21,100
*Quantum Psychology: 699
*Quantum Theology: 447
*Quantum Dentistry: None
*Quantum Massage: 6
**5 of these are objections to pseudoscientific healing nonsense. The last is from a Dutch medical text in which one sentence ends with "quantum" and the next begins with "massage", published in 1895 and having nothing to do with quantum mechanics.
*High-Energy Physics: 844,000
*High-Energy Chemistry: 9,600
*High-Energy Biology: 3
**Two of these are for the same conference proceedings about use of accelerators in biological research. The third is from an article which mentions a list of research areas: "extensive programs in chemistry, physics (other than high energy), biology".
*High-Energy Engineering: 119
*High-Energy Psychology: 1
**Job ad from October 31st, 2001, asking for "high energy psychology, speech pathology or special education majors to work with our mildly autistic son"
*High-Energy Theology: None
*High-Energy Dentistry: None
*High-Energy Massage: 2
*Computational Physics: 510,000
*Computational Chemistry: 599,000
*Computational Biology: 2,910,000
*Computational Engineering: 67,400
*Computational Psychology: 4,620
*Computational Theology: 40
*Computational Dentistry: 11
*Computational Massage: 1
**This is an article about modular wearable electronic devices, in the form of clothing, which provide massage.
*Marine Physics: 3,920
*Marine Chemistry: 136,000
*Marine Biology: 945,000
*Marine Engineering: 108,000
*Marine Psychology: 35
*Marine Theology: 6
*Marine Dentistry: 1
**The paper mentions the application of something in "Transportation, Marine, Dentistry, Electronics" and other fields
*Marine Massage: 1
**Article in "Professional Beauty" of 2021, mentioning "An exceptional massage technique with the professional-only Oligo-Marine Massage Cream includes smoothing, relaxing and stretching movements for total relaxation and optimal skin"
*Astrophysics: 2,010,000
*Astrochemistry: 20,600
*Astrobiology: 226,000
*Astroengineering: 430
*Astrophychology: 64
*Astrotheology: 580
*Astrodentistry: None
*Astromassage: None

==Table with explanations==
*Here all 48 fields can be explained in a table:
{|class="wikitable sortable"
! Field
! Number of Searches
! Explanation of field
|-
| Theoretical Physics
| 3990000
| {{w|Theoretical Physics}} is a whole field in itself, with journals made only for that type of physics. Also the one with by far most hits.
|-
| Theoretical Chemistry
| 445000
|
|-
| Theoretical Biology
| 553000
|
|-
| Theoretical Engineering
| 2460
|
|-
| Theoretical Psychology
| 15500
|
|-
| Theoretical Theology
| 726
|
|-
| Theoretical Dentistry
| 41
|
|-
| Theoretical Massage
| 10
| Theoretical Massage is not a real scientific field{{Citation needed}}, but rather the theory about it, in contrast to the practical application of {{w|Massage|massage}}. This term is most likely to be used in the context of learning or studying massages, for example during the process of becoming a massage therapist. Alternatively this term could refer to the studying of the masses of matter, (or its massage if you will). This would make it a field of physics.
|-
| Quantum Physics
| 478000
| As with Theoretical Physics, above, Quantum Physics is an entire field within itself.
|-
| Quantum Chemistry
| 740000
| A field within chemistry, quantum chemistry is the study of how quantum-level effects extrapolate to chemical properties, such as the shape of electron orbitals.
|-
| Quantum Biology
| 7620
|
|-
| Quantum Engineering
| 21100
|
|-
| Quantum Psychology
| 699
|
|-
| Quantum Theology
| 447
|
|-
| Quantum Dentistry
| None
|
|-
| Quantum Massage
| 6
|
|-
| High-Energy Physics
| 844000
|
|-
| High-Energy Chemistry
| 9600
|
|-
| High-Energy Biology
| 3
|
|-
| High-Energy Engineering
| 119
|
|-
| High-Energy Psychology
| 1
|
|-
| High-Energy Theology
| None
|
|-
| High-Energy Dentistry
| None
|
|-
| High-Energy Massage
| 2
|
|-
| Computational Physics
| 510000
| The field of using computational models to simulate physical systems. Such models are commonly used in both theoretical and applied physics, hence the large number of hits.
|-
| Computational Chemistry
| 599000
| The field of using computational models to simulate chemical systems. Commonly used in the field of theoretical chemistry.
|-
| Computational Biology
| 2910000
|
|-
| Computational Engineering
| 67400
|
|-
| Computational Psychology
| 4620
|
|-
| Computational Theology
| 40
|
|-
| Computational Dentistry
| 11
|
|-
| Computational Massage
| 1
|
|-
| Marine Physics
| 3920
|
|-
| Marine Chemistry
| 136000
|
|-
| Marine Biology
| 945000
|
|-
| Marine Engineering
| 108000
|
|-
| Marine Psychology
| 35
|
|-
| Marine Theology
| 6
|
|-
| Marine Dentistry
| 1
|
|-
| Marine Massage
| 1
|
|-
| Astrophysics
| 2010000
|
|-
| Astrochemistry
| 20600
|
|-
| Astrobiology
| 226000
|
|-
| Astroengineering
| 430
|
|-
| Astrophychology
| 64
|
|-
| Astrotheology
| 580
|
|-
| Astrodentistry
| None
|
|-
| Astromassage
| None
|
|}

==Transcript==
:[A table is drawn with seven columns and six rows. Above each column and to the left of each row there is a label. All 42 fields are filled out with a number, except when the number is 0, then is says none in a red font. Above the table there is a large header:]
:<big>Number of search results on Google Scholar</big>
:{|class="wikitable"
|
| Physics
| Chemistry
| Biology
| Engineering
| Psychology
| Theology
| Dentistry
|-
| Theoretical
| 3,990,000
| 445,000
| 553,000
| 2,460
| 15,500
| 726
| 41
|-
| Quantum
| 478,000
| 740,000
| 7,620
| 21,100
| 699
| 447
| ''None'' 
|-
| High-Energy
| 844,000
| 9,600
| 3
| 119
| 1
| ''None'' 
| ''None'' 
|-
| Computational
| 510,000
| 599,000
| 2,910,000
| 67,400
| 4,620
| 40
| 11
|-
| Marine
| 3,920
| 136,000
| 945,000
| 108,000
| 35
| 6
| 1
|-
| Astro-
| 2,010,000
| 20,600
| 226,000
| 430
| 64
| 580
| ''None'' 
|}

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Potential research opportunities: Quantum Dentistry, High-Energy Dentistry, Astrodentistry, and High-Energy Theology

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Google Search]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Engineering]]
[[Category:Psychology]]
[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Scientific research]]

2351: Standard Model Changes

2020-08-27T03:11:13Z

Aethelred: /* Leptons */filled in blank section. Needs an explanation of what a lepton is, what muons and tau leptons are, conjecure as to why tau was singled out, what neutrinos are, and a better explanation of dark matter. May fix up tomorrow when I have more time

{{comic
| number = 2351
| date = August 26, 2020
| title = Standard Model Changes
| image = standard_model_changes.png
| titletext = Bugs are spin 1/2 particles, unless it's particularly windy.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by VIN DIESEL. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic strip, Randall is proposing some changes to the {{w|Standard Model}} of particle physics. The currently accepted particle table has 15 slots - 12 fermions (six quarks and six leptons) and five bosons (four gauge bosons and one scalar boson, the Higgs). This comic consists of a normal version of the particle table to which Randall has made substantial alternations and additions, which are drawn in red over the black and white table.

While the Standard Model's predictions are very well supported by experiments, the physics community has identified several flaws in it (e.g. it lacks any particles to convey gravity), and so lots of research is committed to searching for "{{w|Physics beyond the Standard Model}}". Some of Randall's changes are sort of intended to fill some of those gaps, but for the most part they are nonsensical.

=== Quarks ===

Randall's proposed changes to the quarks are relatively restrained -- he proposes only that the "strange" and "charm" names should be moved to bosons, while the strange quark should be renamed the "right quark" and the charm quark should be renamed the "left quark", so that all quarks will have "ordinary" directional names.

In reality, the original quark model proposed by Murray Gell-Mann included only three quarks, with the "strange" quark so named because the particles that contained them were ''strangely'' long-lived relative to their masses. The "charm" quark was so named when it was proposed because it brought a "charming" symmetry to the weak interaction, which we now understand is because it completes the second generation of quarks, along with the strange quark. When a third generation of quarks was proposed, they were called top and bottom by analogy to the up and down quarks (which are so named because of the spin they carry).

=== Leptons ===
While Randall leaves two leptons, the electron and the muon, untouched, he has opted to discard the tau lepton entirely. Each of these three leptons has an associated neutrino; Randall has decided to discard all but the electron neutrino, as he has decided that three are too many neutrino types. He has also replaced the standard symbol for the neutrino, the Greek letter nu, with a capital N, in order to avoid confusion between nu and v, the two letters appearing similar. In place of one of the neutrinos, Randall has introduced a new elementary particle that supposedly explains the existence of dark matter. The nature of dark matter is one of the most famous mysteries in physics: galaxies seem to have much higher gravity than their detectable matter would account for, yet this mysterious form of matter does not seem to interact with other matter in any detectable way.

=== Bosons ===

Randall proposes several new names for existing particles. First, that the {{w|W and Z bosons}} should be renamed to the charm and strange bosons, respectively (taking the names from the quarks), and second, that the {{w|Higgs boson}} should be named the {{w|Vin Diesel}} boson, as he considers {{w|Peter Higgs}}'s name to be too boring to be given to a particle. The Higgs boson is known in the popular press (to the chagrin of many physicists, including Higgs) as "{{w|The God Particle (book)|The God Particle}}", which is certainly a flashy name, but which itself was changed by the editors of the book of the same name from its authors' originally-intended title: The ''Goddamn'' Particle.

Speaking of the popular press, Randall also proposes that a false decoy "Magic" particle should be added to the Standard Model, to trip up promoters of {{w|Quantum mysticism}}.

The title text references {{w|Spin (physics)|quantum spin number}}, a property of particles in physics that bears similarities to actual spinning. Although the "cool bugs" particle is put in the {{w|scalar boson}} group with spin 0, Randall states that it instead has spin 1/2, like a fermion. In fact, all known fermions have spin 1/2. It is thus not clear whether the "cool bugs" particle obeys the {{w|Pauli exclusion principle}} or not. The joke comes from Randall treating quantum spin as actual spin and introduces wind blowing the "cool bugs" particle around as if they were made of actual bugs, which they are not{{Citation needed}}.

{| class="wikitable"
! Particle !! Symbol !! Actual particle !! Actual symbol !! Explanation
|-
| Up quark || u || {{w|Up quark}} || u || No change.
|-
| Left quark || l || {{w|Charm quark}} || c || Randall is continuing the pattern of naming quarks after directions. This wouldn't work well with [[474: Turn-On]] unfortunately. The charm quark was named due to bringing a "charming symmetry" to the weak interaction, completing the second generation of quarks.
|-
| Top quark || t || {{w|Top quark}} || t || No change.
|-
| Gluon || g || {{w|Gluon}} || g || No change.
|-
| Vin Diesel boson || V || {{w|Higgs boson}} || H || {{w|Peter Higgs}} is a British theoretical physicist who predicted the existence of scalar bosons, particles with spin 0. Randall suggests that the Higgs boson needs a flashier name and proposes to rechristen it the "Vin Diesel boson", named after American actor {{w|Vin Diesel|Mark Sinclair}}, who has nothing to do with physics.{{Citation needed}}
|-
| Down quark || d || {{w|Down quark}} || d || No change.
|-
| Right quark || r || {{w|Strange quark}} || s || Randall is suggesting this name to match the charm (now left) quark. Particles containing this quark were considered "strangely long-lived". What's strange is how Randall assigns the charm quark the left and the strange quark the right, when so many languages have it the other way around. But since when has Randall cared?
|-
| Bottom quark || b || {{w|Bottom quark}} || b || No change.
|-
| Photon || γ || {{w|Photon}} || γ || No change.
|-
| {{w|Graviton}} || G || (none) || (none) || The graviton is a hypothetical particle which mediates the force of {{w|gravity}}, and would probably belong in the {{w|gauge boson}} group. Randall is taking a very breezy point of view, stating that it would probably be fine to include it even though its existence has not been confirmed yet. It is not recommended to act this way.{{Citation needed}}
|-
| Electron || e || {{w|Electron}} || e || No change.
|-
| Muon || µ || {{w|Muon}} || µ || No change.
|-
| (none) || (none) || {{w|Tau (particle)|Tau lepton}} || τ || The tau lepton is a lepton with average lifetime much shorter than the electron or the muon. Randall apparently considers this particle redundant and states "No one needs tau leptons".
|-
| Strange boson || s || {{w|Z boson}} || Z || The Z boson is one of two particles (three, counting the W boson's different charges) that mediate the {{w|weak force}}, named for having '''z'''ero charge. Randall suggests the strange quark's name would be better suited for this particle.
|-
| Magic || M || (none) || (none) || Randall apparently considers magic to exist and be a particle, both of which are blatantly false.{{Citation needed}} He suggests this particle as a decoy to trip up {{w|quantum mysticism}} promoters, possibly because [[1528: Vodka|he has been possessed]] by [[Black Hat]] and is [[356: Nerd Sniping|trying to run them over with a truck]].
|-
| Electron neutrino || N_e || {{w|Electron neutrino}} || v_e || Randall is annoyed by the similarity of the Greek lowercase nu (ν) and the lowercase V (v). Interestingly Randall leaves the "electron" part of its name in even though he has done away with the other neutrinos.
|-
| (none) || (none) || {{w|Muon neutrino}} || v_µ || Randall thinks one neutrino is enough, and to be honest, who can argue with him?
|-
| {{w|Dark matter}} || D || {{w|Tau neutrino}} || v_τ || Dark matter is a form of matter thought to account for most of the universe's mass. Randall claims to have found it by replacing the tau neutrino with it. This would easily be the most abundant particle in the universe.{{Citation needed}}
|-
| Charm boson || c || {{w|W boson}} || W || The other mediator of the '''w'''eak force. Randall is suggesting that it would suit the charm name more than the charm quark.
|-
| Cool bugs || 🐞 || (none) || (none) || Randall has decreed that extremely small bugs are fundamental particles. Bugs in reality are several orders of magnitude larger than any of the other particles{{Citation needed}} and would not make a good elementary particle{{Citation needed}} for a number of extremely obvious reasons{{Citation needed}} and would make physics pretty frightening to some people.{{Citation needed}} Randall pencils down the insect emoji as the symbol of the cool bugs particle.
|}

==Transcript==
[A chart of the Standard Model of particle physics with red marks all over the chart.] 
Changes I would make to the Standard Model

[In reading order:] 
u up, connected to the down quark below. 
c charm, connected to the strange quark below, in faded gray with a red l left written over it. Above is a red note with an arrow pointing to the charm quark. The note reads, 
Consistent quark names (use "strange" and "charm" for bosons) 
t top, connected to the bottom quark below. 
g gluon 
H Higgs, in faded gray with a red V Vin Diesel writted over it. To the right is a red note with an arrow pointing to the Higgs boson, which reads, 
With all respect to Peter H, the Higgs boson needs a flashier name 

d down, connected to the up quark above. 
s strange, connected to the charm quark above, in faded gray with a red r right written over it. 
b bottom, connected to the top quark above. 
γ photon 
G graviton, in red with a red border. To the right is a red note with an arrow pointing to the graviton, which reads, 
Let's just include it, it's probably fine 

e electron, connected to the electron neutrino below. 
µ muon, connected in faded gray to the muon neutrino below, with red rounded corners cutting it off. 
τ tau, connected to the tau neutrino below, in faded gray with a red scribble over it. On the tau lepton is a red note which reads, 
No one needs tau leptons 
Z Z boson, with the Z symbol and the Z in the name in faded gray. The symbol has a red s written over it and the Z in the name is scribbled out in red. The word strange is written in red between the symbol and the name. 
M magic, in red with a red border. To the right is a red note with an arrow pointing to the magic particle, which reads, 
Decoy particle for people making nonsense claims about "quantum" philosophy stuff 

v e electron neutrino, with the e as a subscript of the v, connected to the electron above. The v is in faded gray and a red N with a circle around it is written on it. Below is a red note with an arrow pointing to the electron neutrino, which reads, 
Fix neutrino symbol so I stop mixing up ν and v 
v μ muon neutrino, with the µ as a subscript of the v, connected to the muon above, in faded gray with a red scribble over it. On the muon neutrino is a red note which reads, 
Too many neutrinos 
v τ tau neutrino, with the τ as a subscript of the v, connected to the tau lepton above, in faded gray. Written over it is a D dark matter in red with a red border. Below the tau neutrino is a red note with an arrow pointing to it, which reads, 
We found it! 
W W boson, with the W symbol and the W in the name in faded gray. The symbol has a red c written over it and the W in the name is scribbled out in red. The word charm is written in red between the symbol and the name. 
🐞 cool bugs, in red with a red border. To the right is a red note with an arrow pointing to cool bugs, which reads, 
Very small bugs are fundamental particles now

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Physics]]

2323: Modeling Study

2020-06-22T22:49:46Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */ Basic summary, needs work.

{{comic
| number = 2323
| date = June 22, 2020
| title = Modeling Study
| image = modeling_study.png
| titletext = You've got questions, we've got assumptions.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an ABSTRACTLY MODELED BOT. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

In this comic, a humorous comparison is drawn between two common types of scientific studies: empirical research, where an experiment is designed to test a scientific theory, and mathematical models, where mathematical formulations are produced to predict how physical systems behave under given circumstances. In empirical studies, hard questions about the limitations of existing theory tend to be addressed in the abstract, the brief summary of the paper that is presented at the beginning of most scientific articles. In modeling studies, assumptions based on existing theory are built into the model, and any problems associated with these assumptions tend to be discussed in the methods section, which outlines the design of an experiment in the case of an empirical study or how the model was designed and the reasoning behind the choices made in the case of a modeling study.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
(There are two columns)

(The column on the left is a piece of paper labeled "EMPIRICAL STUDY". The paper consists of the sections "ABSTRACT", "INTRODUCTION", "METHODS", "RESULTS", and "DISCUSSION". Each section consists of several horizontal lines meant to represent blocks of text. In the middle of the "ABSTRACT" section, there is a large red rectangle. Inside this rectangle is the word "PROBLEM" in large red letters.)

(The column on the right is a piece of paper labeled "MODELLING STUDY". It consists of the same sections, but the large red rectangle with the word "PROBLEM" is in the "METHODS" section instead of the "ABSTRACT" section.)

(There is a curvy arrow pointing from the red box in the paper on the left to the red box in the paper on the right.)

(The caption reads "A MATHEMATICAL MODEL IS A POWERFUL TOOL FOR TAKING HARD PROBLEMS AND MOVING THEM TO THE METHODS SECTION."

{{comic discussion}}

explain xkcd:Sandbox

2018-06-11T03:35:53Z

Aethelred: Undo revision 158641 by Aethelred (talk)

explain xkcd:Sandbox

2018-06-11T03:29:40Z

Aethelred:

__NOINDEX__
Make changes, try things out, or just have fun with the wiki here! Just leave everything above the line alone, please.
[http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=explain_xkcd:Sandbox&action=edit&oldid=91667 clear sandbox]
------
[[1801: Decision Paralysis]]

{{w|History of Japan}} {{w|Page}}

{{w|Page|Display}}

http://existentialcomics.com/comic/234

Something about the Gupta Empire [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India]

Something about [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Tzu Sun Tzu]

1999: Selection Effect

2018-05-29T18:49:07Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */ took a few tries, but I think I got the syntax on my first edit's link right. Sorry, I'm new at this.

<noinclude>:''"1999", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "1999", see [[855: 1999]].''</noinclude>

{{comic
| number = 1999
| date = May 28, 2018
| title = Selection Effect
| image = selection_effect.png
| titletext = fMRI testing showed that subjects who don't agree to participate are much more likely to escape from the machine mid-scan.
}}

==Explanation==

The title refers to the effect in scientific fields where the people who agree to work with a researcher can affect the outcome. For example if I said I wanted to do a study on an embarrassing condition, people who know they have it might be more apprehensive and thus not participate. This can skew the results to say that the condition is rarer than it is. This is called the {{w|selection bias}}, or more precisely, the {{w|self-selection bias}}. Ironically, to avoid any selection bias, researchers would have to force their ''randomly'' selected subjects to participate in their study, but yet the uneasiness shown by the mandatory subjects again skews the results.

Ponytail says that people who agree to be in a study at their lab are less likely to attempt to escape. The only way Ponytail could have come to this conclusion is if she compared those people to people who did not agree to be in the study. This implies that Ponytail has recently kidnapped people for a study, and that most of the people she kidnapped called the police, as one should do when being kidnapped{{Citation needed}}. This makes sense, since if you agreed to the study, you know why you are there, while if you didn't, you may have been kidnapped.

The comic shows Ponytail being allowed to present the results of this study at a conference; reputable scientific journals and conferences should not legitimize studies that clearly violate their ethical norms, such as by failing to obtain informed consent from human subjects before experimenting on them. Unfortunately, involuntary studies are published and presented, one of the most well-known recent examples being [http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/30/facebook-ethics-labratsemotionalcontagion.html Facebook's emotional contagion study]. It is not clear how many people who did agree to participate may have attempted to call the police for assistance regardless; compare the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment Stanford Prison Experiment]. This is similar to previous comics where obvious things are presented in obfuscated, scientific ways (e.g. [[1990: Driving Cars]]).

The title text says that people who didn't agree to go inside an MRI machine are more likely to escape the machine mid-scan. Again, this makes sense, because being put somewhere against your will makes you unsure what is going on, making you try to find a way out.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a chart with some box plots.]
:Ponytail: Our research shows that compared to the overall population, people who agree to participate in scientific studies are significantly less likely to call the police to rescue them from our lab.

{{comic discussion}}

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

1999: Selection Effect

2018-05-29T18:47:38Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */

<noinclude>:''"1999", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "1999", see [[855: 1999]].''</noinclude>

{{comic
| number = 1999
| date = May 28, 2018
| title = Selection Effect
| image = selection_effect.png
| titletext = fMRI testing showed that subjects who don't agree to participate are much more likely to escape from the machine mid-scan.
}}

==Explanation==

The title refers to the effect in scientific fields where the people who agree to work with a researcher can affect the outcome. For example if I said I wanted to do a study on an embarrassing condition, people who know they have it might be more apprehensive and thus not participate. This can skew the results to say that the condition is rarer than it is. This is called the {{w|selection bias}}, or more precisely, the {{w|self-selection bias}}. Ironically, to avoid any selection bias, researchers would have to force their ''randomly'' selected subjects to participate in their study, but yet the uneasiness shown by the mandatory subjects again skews the results.

Ponytail says that people who agree to be in a study at their lab are less likely to attempt to escape. The only way Ponytail could have come to this conclusion is if she compared those people to people who did not agree to be in the study. This implies that Ponytail has recently kidnapped people for a study, and that most of the people she kidnapped called the police, as one should do when being kidnapped{{Citation needed}}. This makes sense, since if you agreed to the study, you know why you are there, while if you didn't, you may have been kidnapped.

The comic shows Ponytail being allowed to present the results of this study at a conference; reputable scientific journals and conferences should not legitimize studies that clearly violate their ethical norms, such as by failing to obtain informed consent from human subjects before experimenting on them. Unfortunately, involuntary studies are published and presented, one of the most well-known recent examples being [http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/30/facebook-ethics-labratsemotionalcontagion.html Facebook's emotional contagion study]. It is not clear how many people who did agree to participate may have attempted to call the police for assistance regardless; compare the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment Stanford Prison Experiment]. This is similar to previous comics where obvious things are presented in obfuscated, scientific ways (e.g. [[1990: Driving cars]]).

The title text says that people who didn't agree to go inside an MRI machine are more likely to escape the machine mid-scan. Again, this makes sense, because being put somewhere against your will makes you unsure what is going on, making you try to find a way out.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a chart with some box plots.]
:Ponytail: Our research shows that compared to the overall population, people who agree to participate in scientific studies are significantly less likely to call the police to rescue them from our lab.

{{comic discussion}}

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

1999: Selection Effect

2018-05-29T18:46:18Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */

<noinclude>:''"1999", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "1999", see [[855: 1999]].''</noinclude>

{{comic
| number = 1999
| date = May 28, 2018
| title = Selection Effect
| image = selection_effect.png
| titletext = fMRI testing showed that subjects who don't agree to participate are much more likely to escape from the machine mid-scan.
}}

==Explanation==

The title refers to the effect in scientific fields where the people who agree to work with a researcher can affect the outcome. For example if I said I wanted to do a study on an embarrassing condition, people who know they have it might be more apprehensive and thus not participate. This can skew the results to say that the condition is rarer than it is. This is called the {{w|selection bias}}, or more precisely, the {{w|self-selection bias}}. Ironically, to avoid any selection bias, researchers would have to force their ''randomly'' selected subjects to participate in their study, but yet the uneasiness shown by the mandatory subjects again skews the results.

Ponytail says that people who agree to be in a study at their lab are less likely to attempt to escape. The only way Ponytail could have come to this conclusion is if she compared those people to people who did not agree to be in the study. This implies that Ponytail has recently kidnapped people for a study, and that most of the people she kidnapped called the police, as one should do when being kidnapped{{Citation needed}}. This makes sense, since if you agreed to the study, you know why you are there, while if you didn't, you may have been kidnapped.

The comic shows Ponytail being allowed to present the results of this study at a conference; reputable scientific journals and conferences should not legitimize studies that clearly violate their ethical norms, such as by failing to obtain informed consent from human subjects before experimenting on them. Unfortunately, involuntary studies are published and presented, one of the most well-known recent examples being [http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/30/facebook-ethics-labratsemotionalcontagion.html Facebook's emotional contagion study]. It is not clear how many people who did agree to participate may have attempted to call the police for assistance regardless; compare the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment Stanford Prison Experiment]. This is similar to previous comics where obvious things are presented in obfuscated, scientific ways (e.g. {{w|1990: Driving cars}}).

The title text says that people who didn't agree to go inside an MRI machine are more likely to escape the machine mid-scan. Again, this makes sense, because being put somewhere against your will makes you unsure what is going on, making you try to find a way out.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a chart with some box plots.]
:Ponytail: Our research shows that compared to the overall population, people who agree to participate in scientific studies are significantly less likely to call the police to rescue them from our lab.

{{comic discussion}}

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

1999: Selection Effect

2018-05-29T18:45:10Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */

<noinclude>:''"1999", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "1999", see [[855: 1999]].''</noinclude>

{{comic
| number = 1999
| date = May 28, 2018
| title = Selection Effect
| image = selection_effect.png
| titletext = fMRI testing showed that subjects who don't agree to participate are much more likely to escape from the machine mid-scan.
}}

==Explanation==

The title refers to the effect in scientific fields where the people who agree to work with a researcher can affect the outcome. For example if I said I wanted to do a study on an embarrassing condition, people who know they have it might be more apprehensive and thus not participate. This can skew the results to say that the condition is rarer than it is. This is called the {{w|selection bias}}, or more precisely, the {{w|self-selection bias}}. Ironically, to avoid any selection bias, researchers would have to force their ''randomly'' selected subjects to participate in their study, but yet the uneasiness shown by the mandatory subjects again skews the results.

Ponytail says that people who agree to be in a study at their lab are less likely to attempt to escape. The only way Ponytail could have come to this conclusion is if she compared those people to people who did not agree to be in the study. This implies that Ponytail has recently kidnapped people for a study, and that most of the people she kidnapped called the police, as one should do when being kidnapped{{Citation needed}}. This makes sense, since if you agreed to the study, you know why you are there, while if you didn't, you may have been kidnapped.

The comic shows Ponytail being allowed to present the results of this study at a conference; reputable scientific journals and conferences should not legitimize studies that clearly violate their ethical norms, such as by failing to obtain informed consent from human subjects before experimenting on them. Unfortunately, involuntary studies are published and presented, one of the most well-known recent examples being [http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/30/facebook-ethics-labratsemotionalcontagion.html Facebook's emotional contagion study]. It is not clear how many people who did agree to participate may have attempted to call the police for assistance regardless; compare the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment Stanford Prison Experiment]. This is similar to previous comics where obvious things are presented in obfuscated, scientific ways (e.g. {{w|Driving cars}}).

The title text says that people who didn't agree to go inside an MRI machine are more likely to escape the machine mid-scan. Again, this makes sense, because being put somewhere against your will makes you unsure what is going on, making you try to find a way out.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a chart with some box plots.]
:Ponytail: Our research shows that compared to the overall population, people who agree to participate in scientific studies are significantly less likely to call the police to rescue them from our lab.

{{comic discussion}}

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

1999: Selection Effect

2018-05-29T18:43:45Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */ added an example; someone please add more

<noinclude>:''"1999", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "1999", see [[855: 1999]].''</noinclude>

{{comic
| number = 1999
| date = May 28, 2018
| title = Selection Effect
| image = selection_effect.png
| titletext = fMRI testing showed that subjects who don't agree to participate are much more likely to escape from the machine mid-scan.
}}

==Explanation==

The title refers to the effect in scientific fields where the people who agree to work with a researcher can affect the outcome. For example if I said I wanted to do a study on an embarrassing condition, people who know they have it might be more apprehensive and thus not participate. This can skew the results to say that the condition is rarer than it is. This is called the {{w|selection bias}}, or more precisely, the {{w|self-selection bias}}. Ironically, to avoid any selection bias, researchers would have to force their ''randomly'' selected subjects to participate in their study, but yet the uneasiness shown by the mandatory subjects again skews the results.

Ponytail says that people who agree to be in a study at their lab are less likely to attempt to escape. The only way Ponytail could have come to this conclusion is if she compared those people to people who did not agree to be in the study. This implies that Ponytail has recently kidnapped people for a study, and that most of the people she kidnapped called the police, as one should do when being kidnapped{{Citation needed}}. This makes sense, since if you agreed to the study, you know why you are there, while if you didn't, you may have been kidnapped.

The comic shows Ponytail being allowed to present the results of this study at a conference; reputable scientific journals and conferences should not legitimize studies that clearly violate their ethical norms, such as by failing to obtain informed consent from human subjects before experimenting on them. Unfortunately, involuntary studies are published and presented, one of the most well-known recent examples being [http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/30/facebook-ethics-labratsemotionalcontagion.html Facebook's emotional contagion study]. It is not clear how many people who did agree to participate may have attempted to call the police for assistance regardless; compare the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment Stanford Prison Experiment]. This is similar to previous comics where obvious things are presented in obfuscated, scientific ways (e.g. {{Driving cars}}).

The title text says that people who didn't agree to go inside an MRI machine are more likely to escape the machine mid-scan. Again, this makes sense, because being put somewhere against your will makes you unsure what is going on, making you try to find a way out.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail stands on a podium giving a presentation in front of a chart with some box plots.]
:Ponytail: Our research shows that compared to the overall population, people who agree to participate in scientific studies are significantly less likely to call the police to rescue them from our lab.

{{comic discussion}}

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

1996: Morning News

2018-05-22T00:29:03Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */ Added explanation of title text

<noinclude>:''"1996", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "1996", see [[768: 1996]].''</noinclude>
{{comic
| number = 1996
| date = May 21, 2018
| title = Morning News
| image = morning_news.png
| titletext = Support your local paper, unless it's just been bought by some sinister hedge fund or something, which it probably has.
}}

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

Megan is complaining to Hairbun about her easy access to infuriating national news stories (these may actually be only headlines, in this context) and bad opinions (editorial headlines, editorial articles, & commentary) and worries that it may be having a negative effect on her, either by promoting misinformation, by distraction, or by prompting adverse emotional reaction to content.

Hairbun sarcastically tells Megan that things were different in her time, then states that access to infuriating stories via newspapers required only a tiny bit more time during a morning routine.

Megan counters this idea and says that while it is true that newspapers provided morning news, they also had much more local news mixed in (which may be of a lighter nature, sometimes referred to in a derogatory sense as "fluff" news pieces), and that bad opinions were not granted wide distribution.

Hairbun agrees with Megan on the former and suspiciously suggests that Megan not check the latter.

The title text is a reference to the fact that many seemingly independent local newspapers are owned by one of a small handful of large corporations, such as New Media and Gannett, a little-known fact that many may find disconcerting.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Megan, looking on a smartphone in her hand, and Hairbun are standing together and talk.]
:Megan: Every morning, before my eyes even focus all the way, I read a bunch of infuriating national news stories and bad opinions. I wonder what this is doing to my brain.
:Megan: It's probably not great.

:[Zoom in to the head of Hairbun.]
:Hairbun: Back in my day, we had to pay people to '''''print out''''' infuriating news stories and bring them to our door. And we waited until we had stumbled out to the '''''kitchen''''' to read them.
:Hairbun: '''''Totally''''' different.

:[Frameless panel, zoom out on both while Megan has lowered her hand holding the phone.]
:Megan: OK, fair. But newspapers at least had more local news mixed in, right?
:Hairbun: Yeah, true.

:[Same as last panel, except it has a border]
:Megan: I bet they weren't full of bad opinions.
:Hairbun: Yyyyyes.
:Hairbun: All our opinions were good. It was a remarkable time.
:Hairbun: Please don't go check.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]

1989: IMHO

2018-05-04T16:17:55Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */ Just putting down the basics since no one else has yet. Very rough draft, needs a lot more editing.

{{comic
| number = 1989
| date = May 4, 2018
| title = IMHO
| image = imho.png
| titletext = "Ugh, TMI." "Yeah, that's some tantalizing meat info."
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The conversation begins with a reference to the controversy between whether the H in IMHO (In my honest/humble opinion) stands for "honest" or "humble". Some older internet users, including Cueball, use it to mean "humble", which Cueball references as being the norm in the 1990s. However, many younger internet users, including, apparently, Ponytail, use it to mean "honest", which became the norm after another SMS abbreviation, TBH (To be honest) became popular c. 2011. However, the joke veers into absurdity with Ponytail sharing her unusual opinions on other internet controversies, including:

Believing the G in GIF (Graphics Interchange Format) is silent, as opposed to the two main camps claiming it should be a hard or a soft G.

Believing a viral picture of a dress that appears black and blue to some people and white and gold to others is actually black and white.

Using tabs after periods, instead of the two main opposing camps of using either one or two spaces.

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

{{comic discussion}}

1986: River Border

2018-04-28T04:03:04Z

Aethelred: /* Explanation */ Corrected a spelling error

{{comic
| number = 1986
| date = April 27, 2018
| title = River Border
| image = river_border.png
| titletext = I'm not a lawyer, but I believe zones like this are technically considered the high seas, so if you cut a pizza into a spiral there you could be charged with pieracy under marinaritime law.
}}

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

[[Ponytail]] explains to [[Megan]] that the Missouri-Nebraska state border is based on the {{w|Missouri River|river}} they are watching. And because the path of rivers mostly only change slowly these borders are typically adopted to that changes. But then she explains that the river once had changed abruptly and the border didn't move with it. That meant that they were on the Missouri side of the river that in fact belongs to Nebraska.

It then occurred to Megan that she could break the law in this area because she is under the mistaken impression that she is in Nebraska but the police can't reach her over the river and Missourian cops actually don't have jurisdiction. In fact, there are no bridges linking it to Nebraska so police would have to go through Missouri in order to get to that part of Nebraska.

The final panel shows Megan saying she's going to cut a pizza into a spiral, which is by no meaning illegal; and she runs for doing more crimes, likely similar illegal like cutting a pizza in an uncommon way.

In the title text [[Randall]] claims the disputed region is probably considered like the {{w|International waters|high seas}}, suggesting that no governmental jurisdiction can apply. He sets up the pizza case into the responsibility something like the {{w|Admiralty law|maritime law}}. But "Pieracy" is a portmanteau of ''pie'' (another name for a pizza) and "piracy" and marinara sauce is frequently served with pizza, so "Maritime" law is rendered "Marinaritime" respectively.

The region mentioned in the comic can be seen here at [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5270132,-95.6954944,10627m/ Google maps] and is known as {{w|McKissick Island}}. In 1904, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Missouri v. Nebraska that a sudden change of a river's course does not change any border.[https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/196/23/case.html]

=== Real-world examples ===
Often, borders defined by a river actually change. There are three methods to define a border:
*The border follows one of the river banks, often in reference to a low-water mark. The exact location of the border is defined in a clear way - but one of the territories will lose terrain through {{w|erosion}}. When the river bends, erosion occurs at the outer bank, and much less at the inner bank.
*The border follows the middle of the river.
*The most usual definition of a riverine border uses the {{w|talweg}}. The talweg (German for "valley path") always follows the line of the deepest points in the water body. Especially at river bends, the talweg is rarely in the middle of the river. Incidentally, the talweg also signifies the navigable zone of a river.

The Mexican-US-Border that follows the Rio Grande is one of the most prominent examples of an international border that needs meticulous regulation. Thus, the {{w|International Boundary and Water Commission}} was created. This commission was involved when the two nations rectified the course of the river, ceding equal amounts of land to each other. The Canada-US-Border is overseen by a similar commission.

One of the causes of the {{w|Iran-Iraq-War}} was the dispute on shipping rights on the {{w|Shatt-el Arab river}}, and because the border was defined as the low water mark at the ''eastern'' side of that river, Iranian shipping was severely restricted. So the Shah of Persia announced to ignore the 1937 treaty on shipping rights, saying that most riverine borders all around the world are defined by the talweg.

Between Switzerland and Italy, the border is, at most locations, defined by the actual {{w|drainage divide}}. Because the {{w|Theodul Glacier}} between {{w|Zermatt}} (Switzerland) and {{w|Breuil-Cervinia}} (Italy) is slowly melting, the drainage divide moves southwards, thus slowly enlarging the Swiss territory.

Most other national borders in Europe are defined today as ''fiat borders'' instead of following natural landmarks like rivers. If a river changes course now, the depicted situation would occur; however, most larger rivers have been rectified more than a century ago and thus don't change course often.

==Transcript==
:[Ponytail and Megan are standing next to a river.]
:Ponytail: This is a cool spot.
:Ponytail: The Missouri-Nebraska state line follows this river. If the river's path changes gradually, the border moves with it.

:[A map is shown with a river from the left to the bottom. A dotted arc is connected on both ends to the river, extending to north-east. An arrow with the text "Old riverbed" points to the arc and it's labeled Nebraska on south-west and Missouri on the other side. The text above the map reads:]
:Ponytail: But when it '''''abruptly''''' changes course, the border stays behind.
:Ponytail: This is a spot where that happened. We're on the Missouri side, but we're in Nebraska.

:[Frameless panel back to Ponytail and Megan.]
:Megan: Wow.
:Megan: So...
:Megan: We can commit all the crimes we want here and the cops can't do a thing!

:[Megan points up her finger.]
:Ponytail: What? No. Why would you even think that?
:Megan: I'm going to cut a pizza into a '''''spiral!'''''
:Ponytail: That's not even illegal!
:Megan: '''''Crimes!'''''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]

1967: Violin Plots

2018-03-15T23:01:23Z

Aethelred: Corrected some spelling and grammar errors

{{comic
| number = 1967
| date = March 14, 2018
| title = Violin Plots
| image = violin_plots.png
| titletext = Strictly speaking, 'violin' refers to the internal structure of the data. The external portion visible in the plot is called the 'viola.'
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|"It is a line plot" someone wrote here. Does that mean Line chart? There is nothing on Wikipedia called Line plot. Also it doesn't says so in the explanation now? Actually the explanation says that a line graph has lines between the points... Is that also not the exact definition, which thus would make this not a line graph/chart... So is it a scatter or box plot with violin overlaid or a line graph with a Violin overlaid?}}

This comic graphs the "suggestiveness" of different visualization types, and the winner is {{w|Violin plot|Violin plots}}, hence the title of the comic. A violin plot is a method of plotting data similar to a {{w|box plot}}, but shows the full probability distribution of the data rather than a "box" showing the central two quartiles. This plot can look like female genitals, as do some of those in the violin plot represented in the comic (strictly speaking, this chart is not purely a violin plot; it is a box plot overlaid onto a violin plot).

The chart compares other visualization types' suggestiveness (as female genitalia) to the violin plots and ranks them after how suggestive they are. In the low end we find {{w|pie chart}}, a circular graph divided into "slices" to show proportions, and {{w|Line chart|line graph}} or line chart, a graph of points connected by line segments.

Almost as suggestive as violin plots are the paintings by {{w|Georgia O'Keeffe}}, an American painter known for her {{w|Flower paintings of Georgia O'Keeffe|paintings of flowers}}. Some of these flowers, ''{{w|Black Iris (painting)|Black Iris}}'' for example, are said to symbolize female genitalia, though O'Keeffe herself denied those claims.

The title text invokes the fact that many people incorrectly use the word "{{w|vagina}}", which refers to an internal structure, for the {{w|vulva}}, which is the external portion of the female genitals. Meanwhile the {{w|viola}} is an instrument often mistaken for a {{w|violin}}. And the word "viola" shares common letters with "vulva."

[[Randall]] has made several comics with [[:Category:Sex|sexual topics]], and the vagina has been the center of attention before, as early as in [[136: Science Fair]]. There is even an entire [[:Category:Penis|Penis category]]. However, these topics haven't appeared recently — the last comic in the penis category was posted more than two years ago, and the sex category hasn't had a new comic since December 2017 (more than three months before this comic).

It possible that pie charts were included because this comic was released on {{w|Pi Day}}. Randall has shown fascination with Pi in earlier comics like [[1292: Pi vs. Tau]]. On the other hand, it could be a reference to the film {{w|American Pie (film)|American Pie}}, which states that putting a finger in a pie feels like putting it inside a {{w|Vagina|Violin}}... It could of course be both reasons, or none of them...

==Transcript==
:[Header over a violin plot type chart:]
:Suggestiveness of different visualization types

:[The chart only has an Y-axis with tics, ranking the points on the plot. There are legends at the top and at the bottom:]
:Suggestive
:Not very suggestive

:[There are four points on the graph, each with a mucosa colored and "violin" shaped probability density around each point. The points are white inside a black box plot like structure with black error bars. The two first points to the left are very low near the bottom of the Y-axis while the two next point to the right are almost at the top of the chart, the last also clearly with the probability density higher than the second last. Above the first two and below the second two points there are legends:]
:Pie charts
:Line graphs
:Georgia O'Keeffe paintings
:Violin plots

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Pie charts]] 
[[Category:Line graphs]]