explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3223: Inflation Timeline

2026-03-23T19:47:54Z

Dextrous Fred: Minor comment

== Sexy? ==

What about the regular/sexy thing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_inflation [[Special:Contributions/155.33.87.241|155.33.87.241]] 19:14, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

:I would say this is an application of the "today's lucky 10,000" concept, but this probably doesn't qualify as a thing that everyone knows by the time they're an adult so the number is probably lower. But I hope this experience of learning something new is still as fun as Coke and Mentos! [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 19:47, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3223: Inflation Timeline

2026-03-23T19:47:29Z

Dextrous Fred: Minor comment

Talk:3200: Chemical Formula

2026-01-30T14:24:25Z

Dextrous Fred: Clarification

I'm disappointed that it wasn't scrollable. [[Special:Contributions/2001:41D0:8:5062:0:0:0:1|2001:41D0:8:5062:0:0:0:1]] 20:20, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
:+1 And funny to think that the universe contains less than a few hundred mol of Americium. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:16B8:CC03:E100:8552:6543:7CF4:9AE7|2001:16B8:CC03:E100:8552:6543:7CF4:9AE7]] 20:57, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
::Time for a campaign to Make Americium Greater? [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 09:32, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:::Some people don't understand sarcasm. Pleaze don't give them ideas. [[User:Gorcq|Gorcq]] ([[User talk:Gorcq|talk]]) 12:15, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

If anyone's interested in an accessible resource for getting more data like this, may I suggest https://ptable.com/#Properties/Abundance/Universe (which I believe derives data from IUPAC sources) [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

surprised to see so much Astatine, he himself declared, that stuff doesnt want to exist so I expected yet a few powers of ten less {{unsigned ip|2a00:6020:479f:6c00:d587:ac2a:d1e2:26a9|21:08, 28 January 2026 (UTC)}}

This does make me curious: how would neutronium be represented in a chemical formula? Or would it be? My impression is it kind of exists 'outside' of chemistry... -Kalil [[Special:Contributions/147.81.60.76|147.81.60.76]] 21:12, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
:Neutron stars would be represented with '''n''' with various mass numbers. And there are no more than 1 mmol (6.02214076×1020) of neutron stars. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C09:EC00:7932:264E:A9E0:8ED0|2001:4C4E:1C09:EC00:7932:264E:A9E0:8ED0]] 21:38, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

What about adding mass numbers? For example, most of the hydrogen is 1H, with small amounts of 2H and trace amounts of 3H. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C09:EC00:7932:264E:A9E0:8ED0|2001:4C4E:1C09:EC00:7932:264E:A9E0:8ED0]] 21:38, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh look, it's the 3200th comic! Yay I guess! --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]][[User Talk:DollarStoreBa'al|Converse]]''''' 22:46, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

An unregistered user (198.48.180.159) added a note that the chemical formula "C11H15NO2" (i.e. C11H15NO2) "has 302 registered isomers". I don't know the source for that number or where those isomers are registered. (It's the formula for MDMA, which is, as noted, "not good to eat".) Would that be the CAS registry? [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 23:20, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
: Don't know if this works, but here's a site that does immediately return 302 compounds: https://pubchemlite.lcsb.uni.lu/compounds?query=C11H15NO2 [[Special:Contributions/8.17.60.225|8.17.60.225]] 04:19, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

10^26 atoms of americium is about 40 kg. But it looks like humans produced tons of americium: https://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/np_237_and_americium.pdf
. If there are other civilizations in the observable Universe, then the amount of americium in the Universe is even higher. So I guess the formula counts only naturally produced elements. But even then it seems underestimated. [[User:Alexei Kopylov|Alexei Kopylov]] ([[User talk:Alexei Kopylov|talk]]) 23:45, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
:In everything that I've checked (I expanded the "list of names" into a table), I could ''not'' discover any universal quantity of americium that was close to Randall's apparent source. Can't exclude the possibility that artificially nucleogenesis played a part in his figures (while mine are from how much was created 'naturally'), but I've just had to go along with it being a completely wrong figure (for the ultimate universal ranking). Much as boron might be given slightly mismagnituded.
:However, if anyone thinks they have the same source that led to the comic's values (and can reconfirm beryllium's estimated order of magnitude, which is the ''only'' reason I decided to start on compiling this amount of extended data, which is actually for all 118 humanly known elements), then you're welcome to correct anything that I left in an incorrect state. [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 00:16, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

...but what if you had a mole of universes? {{unsigned ip|99.109.3.237|00:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)}}

In the explanation, towards the end of the formula for the universe, it says U₁₀². Would that mean that there are only about 100 uranium atoms in the whole universe? That seems way too low. Did the explainer confuse the powers of 10 with rankings (in reverse)? --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 03:48, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:I'm not sure where the error came from, but about half the numbers are drastically too low. Remember, a mole is 6.02*10^23. [[Special:Contributions/174.94.104.215|174.94.104.215]] 05:34, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:Fixed. The powers were just in descending order, one by one. The current values reflect the actual amounts, give or take one or two orders of magnitude. --[[User:1234231587678|1234231587678]] ([[User talk:1234231587678|talk]]) 06:04, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:ok, nvm, i just read that the abundance is according to mass, not actual number of atoms, so half of the numbers are probably wrong :( --[[User:1234231587678|1234231587678]] ([[User talk:1234231587678|talk]]) 04:38, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

In the first paragraph of the explanation it says that the number for helium would be about a third as the number for hydrogen. This seems to compare the total masses for both elements instead of the number of atoms. Hydrogen should account for aprox. 92% of the atoms while Helium is approx. 8%. [[Special:Contributions/2A02:810D:9B99:7800:DECB:CADA:B418:2F1A|2A02:810D:9B99:7800:DECB:CADA:B418:2F1A]] 05:58, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:A very good point. It seems that some sources just neglect to clearly specify whether they're giving abundance in mass fractions or mole fractions (or relative mass totals/mole totals/etc), so probably where errors crept in. But by looking at H and He, if they are roughly 74% vs 24% then it's probably by mass, and the figures probably need adjusting down by the (typical) Z of that element. (So, a third of the mass should be a twelfth of the number, and 12x8%=96%; not far off being 8% vs 92%, well within the casual rounding errors we have accumulated.) If/when I've time, I'll maybe do suitably adjusted values wherever they're needed, but can't do it immediately. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.239.10|82.132.239.10]] 15:02, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Re "Other more complex atoms, up to atomic mass 56, formed later ... as a result of stellar nucleosynthesis". Not all of them; there is another way. Boron and Beryllium are produced by cosmic ray spallation, the splitting of heavier atoms by the impact of energetic particles. [[Special:Contributions/2A12:F43:141A:9F00:A0FA:9260:7BAF:8D57|2A12:F43:141A:9F00:A0FA:9260:7BAF:8D57]] 13:16, 29 January 2026 (UTC) dww-uk

How do we count the atoms that all rollled up into a singularity and otherwise vanished from the universe except to leave a big pinch in it that causes weird gravity effects. [[Special:Contributions/130.76.187.47|130.76.187.47]] 13:37, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:I'd say that's a "hairy" problem. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.239.10|82.132.239.10]] 15:02, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
: Socks?

Off topic, but didn’t Xkcd used to be daily? [[User:Commercialegg|Commercialegg]] ([[User talk:Commercialegg|talk]]) 14:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:Not really.
:There have been 'special weeks', the latest being [[822: Guest Week: Jeph Jacques (Questionable Content)]] to [[826: Guest Week: Zach Weiner (SMBC)]] (with previous all-weekday seqeucnes being "The Race", "Secretary", "1337", "Choices" and "Parody Week"), and a spottier schedule back in the double-digit comics that weren't so strictly (or necessarily restricted to) the M/W/F schedule, and April Fools might come out on the relevent day (although also often on whatever day they were eventually ready!), as per other seasonal comics or ones tied to book-releases/etc.
:Of course, every day ''is'' an xkcd day. As well as ''every day'' there's an xkcd (but of course its generally the same one as came out/should have come out on the prior Monday/Wednesday/Friday release scheduled), and [[1053: Ten Thousand|always something to learn]]... ;) [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 18:58, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
Synthesis of heavy nuclei occurs in kilonovas (neutron star mergers) as well as supernovas (or perhaps kilonovas are considered a form of supernova). [[Special:Contributions/87.75.45.69|87.75.45.69]] 10:42, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Universes can hold the most information out of any molecules. As such, they make for a good computation substrate for god-life, fulfilling same role DNA and RNA has for humans. A single god-life being contains more Universes - as per '''''entire whole infinite Universes''''', not just their visible parts - than Universe has quarks inside of it. --[[User:User 8496351|User 8496351]] ([[User talk:User 8496351|talk]]) 13:20, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

The complete formula is wrong. 10^0 is equal to 1. The artificially produced elements either currently exists in larger quantities, or in case of Og in lower quantities, since not a single atom currently exists on earth. If some of these are created naturally, it is very unlikely they exists in exactly one single atom at a time. --[[Special:Contributions/2001:638:807:507:10D4:7A7B:DB7C:21FF|2001:638:807:507:10D4:7A7B:DB7C:21FF]] 13:41, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
:I believe the complete formula is only attempting to be in the ballpark of the correct number, using the technique (famous in what-if articles) of Fermi estimation to display an exponent which is plausible, even if the exact number is difficult to determine [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 14:24, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3200: Chemical Formula

2026-01-30T14:24:17Z

Dextrous Fred: Clarification

Talk:3200: Chemical Formula

2026-01-28T20:37:29Z

Dextrous Fred:

Talk:3200: Chemical Formula

2026-01-28T20:37:17Z

Dextrous Fred:

Talk:1646: Twitter Bot

2025-12-16T17:00:37Z

Dextrous Fred: Minor comment

Technically, nothing until the actual fight is against the Three Laws -- he didn't tell the bot NOT to do those things. And self-preservation is the third law, so it's allowed to defend itself in a fight, so long as it does not harm Cueball (First Law) -- so let's assume its phaser is set on "stun" (unbeknownst to Cueball) accounting for the pew pew noises, and this is now all within the three laws. Nothing in the Three Laws says it can't *threaten* a human, after all. --[[User:PsyMar|PsyMar]] ([[User talk:PsyMar|talk]]) 08:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
:Also, unless the bot changed its own e-mail -- and I think Twitter sends a verification to the *old* e-mail that must be responded to -- changing the password shouldn't keep Cueball out, as Cueball can reset the password by e-mail. If he gave the bot his e-mail password then that's his fault, as is if he used the same password for his email and Twitter.--[[User:PsyMar|PsyMar]] ([[User talk:PsyMar|talk]]) 08:19, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
::I think it was the EC2 password that changed. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 18:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps, with the recent comics referring to Asimov and the Three Laws of Robotics, it's time to create a new category to collect them? [[User:Oliphaunt|Oliphaunt]] ([[User talk:Oliphaunt|talk]]) 13:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

;Australia

Might it be an allusion to the Terminator series movie? According to director's comment track and movie script, southern hemisphere wasn't hit as hard by Skynet's nuclear strikes. That's why, according to those sources, most background radio chat features NZ- and Australian accents and latin language.
Once Cueball realises that his bot attempt is going the "skynet-route", heading as far aways from the northern hemisphere makes perfectly sense. [[User:DrYak|DrYak]] ([[User talk:DrYak|talk]]) 13:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
* Or it could just be that Australia is on the other side of the world. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.94|108.162.238.94]] 17:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
: Those two facts need not be unrelated. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 23:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
:I interpreted the "cheap flights to Australia" search as that the bot had escaped to Australia and that Cueball was going after it. [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 01:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

;Google Superbowl ad

Is it worth mentioning that this looks like a parody of the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnsSUqgkDwU Google superbowl ad]? Is there a term like ''epistolary'' for a story told in Google searches? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.145|141.101.70.145]] 20:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

;Twitter/X changes and their effect on bots
* This would be the one time where Elon Musk is actually the hero as the Twitter (now X) API changes would have killed the rogue bot. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.174.66|172.70.174.66]] 16:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
:I have bad news about the status of bot presence on Twitter (now X). [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 17:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3133: Dual Roomba

2025-08-27T15:37:11Z

Dextrous Fred: Unimportant comment

wow now way i was here before the page was created ts is crazy [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 04:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
: ... I think the bot is broken? [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 04:33, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
::actually, nope! this behavior isn't too surprising of the bot and it ''definitely'' isn't broken. the bot sometimes has a bit of a lag when creating pages, so you might see the comic page before the talk page is created. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 04:55, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

i'm going to be honest, this is one of the first times in MONTHS that randall has been able to get a laugh out of me from his comics. keep it up, randall! miss the good old days in the 2010s when you had a lot more adult-oriented comics C: '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 05:09, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
:welcome back Tori! how you doing? [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 11:34, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
:it's entirely possible that the last time I saw you edit this wiki was when you commented on my user page! (thanks for that) [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 15:18, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
::hi all, i've been doing well! see y'all around :3 '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 04:00, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

profanity will return to xkcd [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 11:34, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
:pleaseeeeeee 🙏🙏🙏 '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 04:00, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

THE RETURN OF THE LEGENDARY 42.BOOK.ADDICT! MAY SHE BRING PEACE AND UNITY TO ALL READERS AND EDITORS ALIKE! --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:09, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
:[[File:optruemus.gif]] [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 15:10, 26 August 2025 (UTC)15:10, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
:i'm not legendary-i just help out in areas that need some tlc! '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 04:00, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

I know I shouldn't be putting reason into absurdity, but if he already has to intervene to flip one over, why not just clean it by hand? I feel like that would take just as long. [[Special:Contributions/2600:4040:79DD:3A00:B489:424C:28D:8EE7|2600:4040:79DD:3A00:B489:424C:28D:8EE7]] 15:20, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Re "Only Fans": would it be worth mentioning the inverse-rule-34 that happened to the [/r/onlyfans](https://reddit.com/r/onlyfans) (SFW!) Reddit? It used to be about the pornography site, but the moderators lapsed. A new moderator stepped in and converted the sub to be about the household air movers. Their title-puns are delightfully groanworthy [[Special:Contributions/84.155.151.205|84.155.151.205]] 06:08, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

This REEKS of Randall having thought of the pun then backforming the comic to fit it. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 10:45, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Oddly enough, 9 months later you have another Roomba. [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 14:43, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
:This concept was already explored by another webcomic--one which is linked at the bottom of every xkcd! Somewhere way back in the archives of Questionable Content is a running gag about roomba reproduction. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:37, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3091: Renormalization

2025-05-21T17:21:20Z

Dextrous Fred: Adding my two cents

It's been an hour. Does nobody know what this is about? Are we all dumb? [[User:Pgn674|Pgn674]] ([[User talk:Pgn674|talk]]) 22:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not certain. Renormalisation is a concept from quantum field theory in which coupling constants take different values at different scales. I believe the intuition for this is that at longer scales, particles are shielded by a cloud of virtual particles which spring into 'existence' around them and take some of the apparent strength out of the interaction. The best I've got is that somehow this is like an electron hitting off of other imaginary electrons? Maybe the old, since a photon ''(another editor here: of course you meant to say "positron"... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.68|162.158.74.68]] - thank you, good catch [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.164|172.69.79.164]])'' can be interpreted as an electron going backwards in time, there might only be one electron in the universe, it's just bouncing back and forth a lot? But in this case any electron interacting in any way with another electron would be 'hitting itself', so I don't see how that would be a renormalisation specific thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.112|172.70.58.112]] 22:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Wait, I was dumb. Renormalisation is a self interaction, the interpretation in terms of virtual particles is irrelevant. I was over thinking it. Interacting with itself => hitting itself, simple. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.150|172.70.58.150]] 22:59, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Can someone who understands renormalisation better than I add the bit about self-interaction to the explanation? I did not get that at ALL from the linked Wikipedia page (although I did get the Endless Mike reduction joke from it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.106|162.158.62.106]] 03:52, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:I feel you. It seems like the ''site itself'' feels you, the topic is so heavy (maybe it will let me in this time). FWIW, my digging around led me [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHittingYourself here] and, especially, [https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-01-07 here]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.42.88|162.158.42.88]] 04:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm confused about how the joke works with bullying. My best guess: he's hitting the electron whilst telling it to stop hitting itself, so the incongruity becomes cruelty. Is this a common tactic for bullies? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.121|172.69.68.121]] 07:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
:Not sure how common, but it's a trope, pretty much a staple "jocks vs. nerd" establishing scene in any 'high school' setting in film or TV, at times.
:The idea is that the strong and imposing bully grabs the weak and meek bullied's wrist(s) (perhaps even to prevent blows, albeit mostly just annoying and ineffectual, from the victim) and then uses their superior strength to wrest the target's arms so as to strike themselves, accompanied by taunts such as "why are you hitting yourself..? You shouldn't be hitting yourself...", punctuated by the enforced 'self hits'. More towards the "play-tap" range of actual strength, either for practical reasons (they're more like "one-inch punches" than what they'd inflict, directly in a 'proper fight', and the recipient isn't going to try to help any hit from their own hand) or because its intended more as humiliation than actual intent to physically cause great pain (though lesser pain would be part of the 'game').
:It's a performative thing, probably done more to impress the bully's hanger-ons (and/or further embarass the target in front of any other onlookers, especially the girl that the bully thinks it'll impress/dissuade from associating with the target). They may even be some troll logic involved, in that they can ''try'' to claim "they never hit 'em", should authority figures get involved (even be witness to it), though with variable chances of how well that denial is accepted.
:Not that I've ever seen (or experienced or, of course, enacted) it IRL, but I'm sure I've seen the likes in many on-screen situations, at least 'of an era'. If there isn't a TVTropes page, for otz then I'd be surprised, but I'm not going down ''that'' rabbit hole just now, so here's just my own understanding. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.224.200|172.69.224.200]] 15:51, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

From what I, who does not have a physics degree, can tell, renormalization lets you avoid certain infinite sums or products or something that come up when doing calculations with certain interactions between particles. Based on the comic, I infer that at least one situation that produces an infinite series is the interaction of an electron with itself. So renormalization lets you take the sum of all self-interactions of an electron and turn it into a constant, or discard it entirely, or something like that? Can someone smarter than me tell me if I'm getting this right? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.56|172.71.151.56]] 20:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:I might have a degree in physics, but our education on quantum stuff was very weak. My vague impression of renormalization was that equations explain behavior by assuming that for a given particle (like an electron) various virtual particles exist in superposition but many of their interactions cancel out. As someone above said, the particle is thus "interacting with itself" a nigh-infinite number of (theoretical) times. If this simpler conception of renormalization is what Randall is going for, I think the current explanation may be reaching for a more technical (but esoteric) form of the joke.

Talk:3083: Jupiter Core

2025-05-02T01:45:50Z

Dextrous Fred: Pun suggestion

NOOO RANDALL USED ‘DATA’ AS SINGULAR NOOOO I HOPE HE FIXES IT. [[User:Broseph|Broseph]] ([[User talk:Broseph|talk]]) 15:17, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:Used with an information science perspective as it is here, it is usually used as a singular (https://www.thesaurus.com/e/grammar/data-is-or-data-are/). At least, that's what I found while clicking around with one of my computer mouses :P [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 15:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:: From your source: "In academic and scientific writing, the word data is almost always treated as a plural word, as in ''The data collected by the research team suggest that the water supply has been contaminated''." [[Special:Contributions/172.71.144.179|172.71.144.179]] 18:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:English is not Latin. Latin words work differently in English than they do in Latin. In English, "data" is a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun mass noun] (a.k.a., an uncountable noun). For almost as long as the English language has existed, folks have been trying to "correct" people into using Latin rules of grammar, but that's not correct and never has been. [[User:Equites|Equites]] ([[User talk:Equites|talk]]) 16:43, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
::Exactly. English doesn't say noun adjective either only a few things continued that aspect of Romance grammar i.e. fee simple and surgeon general (I'm surprised it's alloidial title not title alloidial!) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.195.74|172.71.195.74]] 20:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
::If "data" aren't countable, then they probably aren't data... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.20|172.68.205.20]] 00:35, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
Can someone fix the formatting for the table, it’s annoying on mobile and shrinks the page because its 1 row [[User:Commercialegg|Commercialegg]] ([[User talk:Commercialegg|talk]]) 15:35, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
: Nevermind, it wasn’t loading properly [[User:Commercialegg|Commercialegg]] ([[User talk:Commercialegg|talk]]) 15:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
: Sorry, that was on me. Just figuring out how to use tables. [[User:BobcatInABox|BobcatInABox]] ([[User talk:BobcatInABox|talk]]) 17:07, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

I think it contains nougat. Perhaps with further study of Jupiter, humanity will finally be able to learn what, exactly, nougat is. [[User:Equites|Equites]] ([[User talk:Equites|talk]]) 16:35, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jupiter_diagram.svg This image] has always given me the impression it's actually a delicious frozen cake. [[User:Zmatt|Zmatt]] ([[User talk:Zmatt|talk]]) 18:08, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:Nonsense - it's obviously a toy/choking hazard.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.89|141.101.99.89]] 08:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Two things:

1: It looks like Jupiter is made of avocado flesh in the avocado pit image.

2: If jupiter were a giant avocado with the same mass, it would represent 95 quadrillion years' worth of global avocado production.
--'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[DSBContribs |'''''My life choices''''']] 19:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
:Sounds like a solution to the quacamole crisis since Trump's tariffs on Mexico. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 17:14, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:There's probably some pun to be made about a mole of guacamole, but you would actually need several thousand moles of avocados to equal the mass of jupiter.

Also, the baby Jupiter raises questions about it's sexuality. Also who the father is. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[DSBContribs |'''''My life choices''''']] 19:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

: Jupiter's parents are Saturn and Opis. Seems as if Saturn is a single parent since Opis is nowhere to be found in the solar system. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.109.86|172.69.109.86]] 21:51, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:: It looks to me like Velikovsky confused Aphrodite with Athena. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.150.94|172.69.150.94]] 17:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

In an Arthur C. Clarke novel, I think ''2010: Odyssey Two'', it was postulated that the core of Jupiter is diamond. I have since seen articles from others with a similar theory. It is apparently plausible, given the extreme pressures and presence of carbon. [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 13:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Who else didn't know the movies and thought 2010: Odyssey Two was a comic (probably just me) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.166.89|172.71.166.89]] 15:19, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

What's up with the description "Hard ball from avocado" rather than "Avocado pit"? The only results from a Google search for "Hard ball from avocado" reference this XKCD, so it doesn't seem to be some commonly-used term for an avocado pit that I'd never heard. Did Randall just have a brain fart and forget the word "pit"? Seems unlikely. If not, if there some hidden meaning to "Hard ball from avocado"? [[User:SethML|SethML]] ([[User talk:SethML|talk]]) 15:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
:Presumably it's because the joke rests on the fact that it's roughly spherical, so makes a decent analogy with a planetary core (and if you cut in to the avocado in the right way you could make it look sort of like one of those cutaway planetary layer diagrams). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.14|172.70.162.14]] 15:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
: Gemini [https://g.co/gemini/share/3341d4e56595 seems to have] a better understanding of humor than I do: "The phrase highlights the mundane, everyday nature of an avocado pit and the unsophisticated way it's described ("hard ball"), making its inclusion as a "leading theory" for the core of a gas giant planet ridiculous and therefore funny. It's unexpected and breaks the pattern of the more scientific-sounding labels, contributing to the overall แหย่ (yae - playful teasing) tone of the strip." [[User:SethML|SethML]] ([[User talk:SethML|talk]]) 15:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Apparently, if Jupiter really were an avocado it would be about 1/4 less dense. Weirdly, googling the two gave me avocado density in kg/m^3, and Jupiter density in g/cm^3... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.13|172.70.162.13]] 16:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3081: PhD Timeline

2025-04-25T15:49:31Z

Dextrous Fred: Setting the tone

What an age we live in... --[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al | Converse]][https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa%27al My life choices] 15:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Events like this are scary, and they're even scarier if you have a personal or geographic connection to them like Randall does. I can understand why he would feel frustrated about his inability to do something concrete, and if this comic raises awareness for the situation then it has done a good thing. Not sure why I thought this comment was necessary; maybe it's just a way of processing the emotions that the comic made me feel. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3077: de Sitter

2025-04-24T19:44:58Z

Dextrous Fred: Appreciation

the titletext still needs an explanation, but i'm not sure i get the connection to conformal field theory; i suspect it has to do with the explosive rate at which hyperolic space seems to "expand" when travelled through, as a pun on the club expanding at a similar rate? - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 07:01, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.137|162.158.90.137]] 07:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC) I think it's alluding to {{w|AdS/CFT correspondence}}, which I think is a string theory thing.

In hyperbolic space, parallel lines DON'T meet when extended, and in elliptic space they DO. Also, the rotation thing looks strange. In any of the basic geometries you have 360 degrees in a circle. The sum of angles in triangle will be different (smaller than 180 in hyperbolic space, larger in elliptic space). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.213.151|172.68.213.151]] 07:58, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
: Agreed. I went and changed it. Though technically, the stuff about parallel lines is still wrong. Parallel lines don't meet by definition, and spherical geometry doesn't have them. Maybe someone can add a better explanation? [[User:DanielLC|DanielLC]] ([[User talk:DanielLC|talk]]) 09:19, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

The yellow wood is a hyperbolic space.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.4|141.101.99.4]] 08:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

maybe a pun on "babysitters are not welcome here" [[User:Translated ORK|Translated ORK]] ([[User talk:Translated ORK|talk]]) 09:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Fun Fact: the german version of Anti-de Sitter space in wikipedia refers to a [Randall–Sundrum model|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randall%E2%80%93Sundrum_model] {{unsigned ip|172.69.150.119|09:20, 17 April 2025 (UTC)}}

"...less than 180° in a full rotation" - Shouldn't this be either "...less than 360° in a full rotation" (or perhaps "...the angles of a triangle add up to less than 180°"). [[Special:Contributions/172.69.186.206|172.69.186.206]] 09:53, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I've started to explain the title-text, but not well. I don't really understand either of these concepts. {{unsigned|Xnerkcd|10:01, 17 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I don’t really know how to explain it well, but the wikipedia page on these spaces says it’s negative SCALAR curvature. That is a different concept from what is currently being explained here. The intuitive dimension of curvature applies only to 2-dimensional spaces. In higher dimensions you can look at 2D-slices, and the curvature of those is called the sectional curvature. Scalar curvature is then something of an average of those. Notably, if scalar curvature is negative, that does not mean sectional curvature necessarily always is (though perhaps the higher symmetry of these spaces enforces this? I’m really not sure). The main way you can measure scalar curvature is by calculating the volume of a sphere of radius r – if the scalar curvature is 0 it’ll be the usual formula from Euclidean space, but if it’s negative, then for sufficiently small radii the volume will be bigger than expected (intuitively, more space gets crammed around each point). Feel free to incorporate this into the article. {{unsigned ip|172.69.225.250|10:30, 17 April 2025}}

I thought it might be a play on "housesitter" and the fact that anti and de can denote negatives, but I'm not sure how [[User:BeeVee|BeeVee]] ([[User talk:BeeVee|talk]]) 14:37, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

This seems too well-timed to not reference Idaho's Everyone is Welcome Here controversy. {{unsigned ip|172.68.35.117|15:57, 17 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Is this the first strip where the title begins with a lower-case letter? Also, I just noticed that the site's strips use small-caps, while this site uses traditional case. Is that something worth examining? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.98.3|172.71.98.3]] 15:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:1) Nope. 2) What? --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:55, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::Then which one is the first? [[User:Translated ORK|Translated ORK]] ([[User talk:Translated ORK|talk]]) 09:04, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::The first I found was [[dPain over dt]], the (previous) latest was [[the Wrong Stuff]]. There were ''twenty-nine'' of them, in my quick scan (nine of them in the "xkcd Phone" series). Seven of them had no capital letters at all. (<s>Surprisingly, [[IPod]] doesn't start with "i", though two other direct Apple references do.</s> ''edit: Misread+misremembered it. It's [[IPoD]] and isn't even the direct Apple reference itself, at best an allusion to it. ;) '')
:::It happens frequently enough (around 1% of all comics, so far) to not be particularly noteworthy. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.106|172.71.26.106]] 10:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Parallel lines by definition are lines that do not meet... So if they meet they are not parallel, though yes at close range they might appear parallel... --[[User:Trimutius|Trimutius]] ([[User talk:Trimutius|talk]]) 03:36, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:Draw them on a sphere (i.e., a space with positive curvature, a.k.a. a de Sitter space) and they do. The canonical example of this is the lines of longitude on the Earth, which really are parallel at the equator and yet definitely meet at the poles. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.150|172.68.205.150]] 07:50, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::I think the point being that they aren't parallel lines if they do meet, they (just like on hyperbolic planes) have points where a line that crosses both does so at 90° to each. By the parallel postulate, there are no possible parallel lines (geodesics) in spherical geometry, though there are parallel-line surrogates (the parallel curves of lines of latitude, for example) that obey a looser interpretation. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.106|172.71.26.106]] 10:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
::Yes on a sphere you can have triangle made out of 3 right angles... Is it made out of three parallel lines? Of course not, at least that is not how mathematicians treat it... The proper replacement of parallel line postulate in de Sitter space is that all lines intersect, so there is no parallel lines... --[[User:Trimutius|Trimutius]] ([[User talk:Trimutius|talk]]) 14:07, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm a chemist. Mr. Markovnikov shouldn't appear near my house! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.102|162.158.103.102]] 11:18, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:I understood that reference. Thank you [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 19:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

i think the joke is that his house is a Euclidian space. Because he wants all triangles to add up to 180 degrees and 2 parallel lines to never meet.
 Basically he just wants his house to function normally, not fall down, and have regular corners {{unsigned ip|172.71.151.156|01:14, 23 April 2025}}

I've added a leading paragraph with some background for non-mathematicians, and swapped the order of the definitions for ''de Sitter space'' and ''anti de Sitter space''. Hopefully that resolves the '''incomplete''' tag; if you agree, please remove the tag.
[[User:Kurahaupo|Kurahaupo]] ([[User talk:Kurahaupo|talk]]) 10:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3073: Tariffs

2025-04-09T20:14:42Z

Dextrous Fred: April fool's comic now exists

{{notice|This comic and explanation is about present-day politics and {{w|Donald Trump|Donald Trump, the current President of the United States}}. Additionally, the comic is about a political policy point that has disparate viewpoints which are both backed by extensive study and rarely implemented well. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}, meaning that you don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block and ignore}}. If you are not an admin and need assistance in blocking someone, send a message to [[User:Kynde]] or [[User:Theusaf]]. As with these contentious topics, please do not edit if you believe you have a conflict of interest or might be writing in a biased and slanted manner (in regards to both major American political parties). Be {{w|WP:BOLD|bold}}, but not reckless. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. Thanks, '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

Uh, still no April fools [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 23:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
:The April fools is the president the U.S. Elected. (note: I am Usanian)[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.232|172.70.214.232]] 12:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I have good news [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
I felt like using all caps is a good idea for explanations, since the comic itself is all caps [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 00:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
: Please don't. If you did that, then all of the other explanations and transcripts would have to be edited to all-caps, which makes it harder to read. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Doesn't just about ''every'' xkcd comic use all-caps? That would make pretty much the entire wiki unreadable. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.155.35|172.71.155.35]] 04:15, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the explanation? It's showing this weird string of letters: expDia thud enzo Isla idiosyncrasies talk 3totheaudienceandtheotherswhoareyouheresoearlyinthedayafterMittenslefttodois sign up for both ofuscan'twaitforthemostparttobeabrightandwarmwelcomeandIhopethatyouwillfindapenthatwillOrbitz pap [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23 7 April 2025 EST
: Vandals --[[User:Btx40|Btx40]] ([[User talk:Btx40|talk]]) 00:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::I'm getting a few Cloudflare messages that the server isn't responding. I'm used to explainxkcd giving straight 503s, etc, but this is the kind of thing (code 522, in at least one case) that you get only when an active pressure (crap-spamming, etc) is being applied. I'm wondering if there's some pushback from the pro-tariff (or at least 'pro-Donald') online community. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 11:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, just HOPEFULLY, we can prevent the comment section from devolving into insults like https://xkcd.com/1756/: I'm With Her. [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 01:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I concur, though I want to stress that I think it's very important that we try to make this comic explanation as neutral as possible. Is it possible to not show a bias towards either side of the issue? Randall's comic obviously has a point of view, but perhaps the explanation on this site can be a little bit more neutral. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 11:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:You stink! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.181|172.70.91.181]] 13:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comic [[2566]] was supposed to be a joke... --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.175.87|172.68.175.87]] 03:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

"venmo" needs explaining. Apparently it's some sort of USAian proprietary payment system? And I think Ponytail's company is providing a service (which the USA exports of lot of), rather than selling equipment - services usually not being captured by simple trade figures for goods. And in order to post here I have to identify features of foreign street scenes in order to train a monopolist's proprietary image recognition system. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 13:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, didn't read this first, but I ''just'' put a link in for that (slightly awkwardly, but best I could - expecting a later editor to better phrase/place it). Hadn't heard of it, myself. Presumably Leftpondians know about it a lot more, perhaps most do, given how much business it gets/facilitates ''only'' in the US. Anyway, consider me one of those that learnt something new today! (Not that I can, or would, use it, of course.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.71|172.70.163.71]] 13:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this comic as an answer to a Politics.SE question. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/60191/does-it-make-sense-to-treat-trade-deficit-as-tariffs/60229#60229 [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This is unironically the best explanation of Trump's tariffs I've seen
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.212.171|162.158.212.171]] 14:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:I had a Facebook friend post almost the exact same analogy the day before this comic was released. So it is an idea that is out there. But since Trump do not care for the people who elected him, it is not his problem that everything gets more expensive in the US --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Midwit take from Randall that fundamentally misunderstands that the goal is to bring back manufacturing capability to the USA. Warren Buffett proposed these exact tariff measures 20 years ago and is only now saying they're bad because Orange Man Bad Amirite. https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf {{unsigned ip|172.68.12.75|16:43, 8 April 2025}}
:I've just read the paper you linked, which suggests issuing tradable / saleable import certificates to create a liquid market incentivizing a trade balance, one which is not country or industry directed at all and has, basically, nothing to do with Trump's "plan." They are not "the exact same" at all, and I'm not surprised that someone using "orange man bad" language is engaging in deception. {{unsigned ip|172.69.214.221|17:24, 8 April 2025}}
:Are you even sure you *want* to bring back manufacturing of all kinds to the USA? Do you understand what that entails? Every single sane economist on earth has been telling Trump from the start that this is an astonishingly bad idea, but he refuses to listen. Then again, every single sane climate scientist has been doing the same thing, and nobody listens to them either. All fitting, then.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.136|172.70.243.136]] 06:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:And what exactly is wrong with domestic manufacturing? Don't get me wrong, I don't consider (R) good, but the concept of "they're all just stupid" doesn't explain anything in the real world. {{unsigned ip|162.158.103.81|10:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::Well. It makes as much sense for the USA to manufacture iPhones domestically as it does for you to grow your own wheat and sunflowers and gather rock salt and process all that to bake bread. The world economy works by distributing work and relying on specialization. Doing everything on your own is grossly inefficient and it's simply impossible to keep up your standard of living that way.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.172.178|172.71.172.178]] 10:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Another response is that if you're determined to prove that your country doesn't need to trade with the rest of the world (at an extreme, what NK is trying to do, though majorly propped up by China despite this), the rest of the world might decide that it doesn't need to trade with you.
::The US has been (successfully) pursuading much of the world that it is a vital part of the world economy for a long time, and benefited more from it than cold, hard balance sheets could ever show. (Even in 'not friendly' nations, there has been cultural soft-power arise from the value of american denim jeans or records or even just the idea that there are more ways to do things than their current despotic ruler would openly admit to.) You could always find places to spend black-market dollars in Moscow, Havana or any place in any "Democratic Republic" (that's neither democratic nor strictly a republic) you could mention, and to the overall net benefit of the US. As well as being friendly to friendly countries, it has been insidious to those less than amicable (at a governing level).
::There's probably something to be said for not ''entirely'' relying upon third party countries (or at least not entirely upon ''singular'' third party countries, or entire political blocks/'blocs') that could suddenly put you under pressure regarding vital resources and components. Look at the hoops that Russia had to jump through, dependant upon China (and even NK!) for resources it was suddenly in need of. But the US was already in the position to be trading with any and all parts of the world (that it chose to), the ''cost'' was that maybe it couldn't sell quite as much worth in the form of cadillacs to a small group of islands that provided it with a given value of fish, but the value is that they'll ''keep on'' preferentially selling fish (that obviously the US can make use of).
::Now... Well, such fish that may be caught might go elsewhere, the world markets shuffle about, perhaps China gets more fish (perhaps NK does?) if it has demands for them, or perhaps it no longer seems worthwhile fishing so much from those islands. If there's nothing else for fishermen to do, maybe they'll go elsewhere to find something, but don't expect them to immigrate to the US and fish there, 'internally'. Not with the recent policies on immigration. So, the US probably has fewer fish, China has more soft-power (and probably hard-power, too) and the world adjusts to a state where in trying to win 'trade wars' against the whole world, the US has surrendered most of its trading power to the kind of countries that were previously trying hard to become its equals (and now become its superiors).
::If the current guy was ''really'' serious about "Gina" being his trading opponent, he'd work specifically against their influence, not actually make it more likely to increase. And that doesn't fit well with trying to split China and Russia again (even if he's making Russia and the US comrades in arms, again, in a separate deal).
::Before anyone points at the ungainly notice about bias/slanted opinion, I'm just outlining an interpretation here that shows contradictions in the scheme of the ultimate "re-on-shoring of ''everything''" drive being nothing but good. There's probably a better balance. Possibly not a guaranteed win:win, but at worst a lose-least:lose-least one. But such a Prisoner's Dilemma situation can't happen when one of the prisoners seems to only believe in win:lose results, so that they always aim (however wrongly) only for a maximised return on their side, resulting in an unsatisfactory lose:lose (or even lose:gain, to their own disadvantage) outcome. Also, I'm not 'Merkin myself. I'd ''rather'' a stronger US than various other nations getting stronger, actually, and that's why I'm worried that the world may pivot in ways that (openly, at least) the current US Administration don't actually want.
::But global trade is hard. "Who would have though it to be so hard..." Who knows where this will lead (especially if it strays out of the purely financial sphere, which of course it is already doing). Simply restoring manufacturing to the US is not the simple panacea that some might suggest. Aluminium (yeah, I know, but that's my spelling) can be made far cheaper in Canada than in the US and that's not going to change within four years (maybe not fourteen, could take more than forty!) and this and all the other supply-ripples won't happen fast enough (especially with far too much stick and practically no carrot) to fulfil the aspirations being espoused. So you absolutely can't take the current plans at face value. I'd be surprised if most of the ones touting them even believe them, and there must actually be more ulterior motives behind the wrecking-ball that's being unleashed, to which they're in more of a position to benefit from. (Time will tell, maybe. Perhaps it'll all work like a charm, but I'd heavily bet against it if I actually had the resources to significantly benefit out of the future failure, and yet couldn't do anything to reverse it.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.110|172.71.241.110]] 11:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

There should be a "don't feed the trolls" banner at the top of the discussion. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.8|162.158.159.8]] 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
:There's already a "Don't be a jerk!" rule noted at the bottom. Could just move it to the top, I suppose. (Or better, just move it to the top only for topics that are likely to lure people into acting like jerks. Good way to tell whether a given strip is going to upset a lot of people...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.96|172.70.42.96]] 22:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
::made a notice about it up top '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:::TORI! YOU'RE BACK! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm from Germany, with the opposite issue. I never understood why having an export surplus should be a good thing. Let's make a bilance. OUT: Cars, machines, chemicals,... IN: Little printed paper snips (or little bytes if paid more modern). Sounds like a bad swap to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 07:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:Former Financial Times and World Bank economist Tim Harford's "Undercover Economist" pop-econ books explain this quite well. (I don't think I can do Harford's explanation justice here but I shall try; any mistakes are my own) Germany wants to trade (for example) oil with OPEC, but all it has to trade are (for example) BMWs and OPEC doesn't want enough BMWs relative to how much oil Germany wants. So, Germany sells the extra BMWs to America in return for US dollars (the international currency for oil trading) and uses the US dollars to buy the oil. Economically, a BMW factory is basically a machine that converts steel into petrol via a really roundabout process. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.32|172.70.85.32]] 18:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It looks like Randall saw the most recent video from StandUpMaths. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.161|16:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)}}

I'm not sure if it was actually intended, but it seems that everyone missed the potential second meaning in the last frame. It's possible that Ponytail was referring to lidar diodes as a heat source used to cook the pizza, and Cueball either mistakenly or sardonically responded as if the mentioned diodes was instead suggested as a topping. That might also be a jab at political discussion, which is often full of spirited rebuttals based on misinterpretations of the opposing side's comments. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 17:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock comment sections? I feel like it would be especially helpful in comics like these. And while Reddit is usually not a good example for anything them locking the comments for contentious content (hehe) is actually a really good idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.12.75|172.68.12.75]] 17:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
:The talk page ''could'' be semi-protected (to various degrees: admin-only editing, autoconfirmed-only editing) by an admin (your best bet would be to ask [[User:Kynde]]). I would recommend against such drastic moves for the moment, as the vandalism and trolling isn’t that bad (''yet''). If it does get worse, I’ll make sure to send a message to Kynde. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
::Fair enough, haste never gets anyone anywhere and it'd appear unjustified to do something that severe if it isn't that bad enough. But if it gets to the level of the I'm With Her comment section and nobody has asked for it to be locked, I'll ask Kynde like you asked. In any case, I'll wait. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.223.147|172.71.223.147]] 17:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, explainxkcd has gone off the cliff, and not just on this particular article, but repeatedly, and it’s getting worse and worse. I'm not going to edit it myself, but might I suggest a rule of thumb? If it isn’t necessary to help some understand the COMIC, then don’t put it in there in the first place! [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.176|172.69.23.176]] 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3068: Rock Identification

2025-03-27T17:38:28Z

Dextrous Fred: Minor comment

I made a transcript [[User:New editor|New editor]] ([[User talk:New editor|talk]]) 21:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

It might also imply that the geologist doesn’t know but just wants the $5 so comes up with an answer [[Special:Contributions/198.41.236.163|198.41.236.163]] 00:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I doubt they're lying about what rock it is since both mica schists and garnets are visually obvious and even more obvious if a scratch test is performed.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.186.157|172.69.186.157]] 04:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

The funny part is it works the other way round: you first identify minerals by sight (also Mohs scale and polarizing microscope), then conclude what the geologic context is. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.232.25|172.71.232.25]] 11:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I think this random "it was wrapped in the bill, no idea where the money came from" also implies corruption and destroying the traces of the money, instead of just payment or tip. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 11:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunate missed chance to call this comic a “Geologist Tip” [[Special:Contributions/172.70.176.56|172.70.176.56]] 13:04, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Surely the joke is that it only takes $5 to bribe a Geologist.
:Hey, if you want to pay me $5 to pay attention to you for a minute, I would take the deal. That's a great hourly rate! Though I guess my perspective might be skewed, since I'm not a professional scientist but just a (somewhat broke) grad student[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 17:38, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

3012: The Future of Orion

2024-11-16T16:09:18Z

Dextrous Fred: Adding references to other relevant comics

{{comic
| number = 3012
| date = November 15, 2024
| title = The Future of Orion
| image = the_future_of_orion_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x300px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Dinosaur Cosmics
}}

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

Stars in the night sky change over time. Some, like {{w|Betelgeuse}} (a star in the constellation {{w|Orion (constellation)|Orion}}), are expected to go {{w|supernova}} in less than about 100,000 years, and then disappear from the night sky. Additionally, practically all stars are moving, relative to the center of the galaxy and to each other. This results in {{w|Proper motion|apparent movement}} in our sky, a function of the actual relative movement against the general background, and the star's distance from us. The star with the fastest proper motion is {{w|Barnard's Star}}, which has moved a noticeable distance across the sky since it was first photographed in 1888. It both has a high relative movement and is the fourth-closest star to us, after the three stars of the Alpha Centauri group.

This comic shows some changes in Orion from the stars moving and recommends revising the {{w|constellation}}, or at least creating a new {{w|Asterism (astronomy)|asterism}}, from depicting one which depicts a hunter to another matching the {{w|Tyrannosaurus}} from Ryan North's [https://www.qwantz.com Dinosaur Comics].

There are no official constellations currently depicting dinosaurs. The process of recognizing constellations started around 3000 BC for the northern hemisphere, continued with the investigations like those of {{w|Ptolemy}} (in the 2nd century AD) who used Greek mythology for visible 'southern' constellations and was more or less set in stone after voyages to the southern hemisphere by European navigators, like {{w|Johann Bayer}}, in the early 17th century. The first fossil to be later identified as a dinosaur was found in 1676, and the term "dinosaur" was not introduced until 1842 to describe them. As the {{w|International Astronomical Union}} did not establish the current official list of constellations until 1922, though, they could have recognized a dinosaur constellation had one been proposed and widely accepted. There is, however, a constellation of another large, fearsome reptile, albeit mythological -- a {{w|Draco (constellation)|dragon}} (one of Ptolemy's) -- and {{w|Lacerta}} ("the lizard") was defined in 1687.

Note that this means the new constellation won't appear until the current name has lasted twenty times as long as it already has, highlighting the absurdity of "needing" to plan for this event.

The title text is another joke regarding Dinosaur Comics, replacing "comics" with "cosmics" because we're talking about a dinosaur in the sky.

Orion is also mentioned in [[1020: Orion Nebula]].

T-Rex is also featured in [[1452: Jurassic World]]. In 2006, Randall emulated the style of Dinosaur Comics with [[145: Parody Week: Dinosaur Comics]].

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:Orion Today:
:[Star map of Orion constellation 2024]

:Predicted Changes:
:[Scribbled on]: Star movement
:[Scribbled on]: Star Death (Betelgeuse)
:[Star map's predicted changes over next couple centuries]

:Orion in the future:
:[Scribbled on]: Suggested lines
:[New lines are drawn overlaying the future changes]

:[[https://www.qwantz.com/ Dinosaur Comics] dinosaur overlayed]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Dinosaurs]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Comics with red annotations]]

Talk:3001: Temperature Scales

2024-10-22T15:23:26Z

Dextrous Fred: An admonition

Shouldn't Rankine say "0ºR is set to absolute zero"? {{unsigned ip|172.70.230.29|22:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)}}
:Yep. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.253|162.158.186.253]] 04:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

yo,i thought comic 300 was anticlimactic so randall would make this one COOL but sadly not
Same. Hope he does something cool for 3072.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.225|172.69.134.225]] 23:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

really he didn't do anything special for this either? come ON randall if you don't do something cool for comic 3072 i will come to your house personally and yell at you [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 23:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

 
What's random about Fahrenheit? (Answer: nothing.) 0F is the freezing point of brine, 100F (or 98.7) is the human body temperature. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.65|172.68.54.65]] 00:00, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:What concentration of brine? (And which specific salt... No, not NaCl, as you might presume but NH4Cl!)
:And body temperature varies a lot ('typically' 36.5–37.5°C or 97.7–99.5°F, though even this range is thought to be too small), across genders, individuals, time of day ''and'' which orifices/surfaces you try to measure it from. (Originally, it was set so that '''90°F''' was to be the 'best guess' of human body temperature. It gradually changed, including via various {{w|Human body temperature#Historical understanding|compounded misunderstandings}} so that the best you can say is that 100°F is arbitrarily ''slightly above'' most afebrile human body temperature measurements.)
:Celsius might be a bit off (arguments about triple-point or STP freezing, etc), but it still has far more physical logic to it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.188|172.70.160.188]] 01:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, Randall, for my comfort, Fahrenheit is the least cursed. It's the best scale to use for my personal use, especially when hearing the weather report and deciding what to wear outdoors: temp in the 80's - no jacket. temp in 70's - maybe a windbreaker if it's breezy. 60's - sweater weather. 50's - medium weight coat. 40's - winter coat. 30'3 - winter coat with scarf and gloves. 20's - multiple layers. teens - stay indoors. None of the other scales provide such convenient distinctions for my daily life. Kelvin is great for astro physics or super conductivity, but useless for any common uses. Celsius is great for hanging out with the Euro crowd but still not so useful to scale my home thermostat. I judge Fahrenheit as 1.0 for cursedness. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 14:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I'm most disappointed that {{w|Delisle scale}} was not represented... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.188|172.70.160.188]] 01:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
: I was so hoping for a {{w|Planck temperature}} quip. Like: "Water freezing point: 0; Water boiling point: 0; Notes: 1 = highest possible temperature (1.4E32K) where thermal radiation creates black holes; Cursedness: 0/0" [[Special:Contributions/162.158.164.184|162.158.164.184]] 01:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:: Same here. Freezing is 0.000000000000000000000000000001928 and boiling is 0.0000000000000000000000000000026338. [[User:DanielLC|DanielLC]] ([[User talk:DanielLC|talk]]) 03:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
::: Wow, those are even smaller than the IEEE floating point representations of 1-1.0/3*3! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.109|162.158.90.109]] 03:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I guess I was wrong in my comment on the last comic. sigh. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 01:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

It's actually spelled {{w|Wedgwood scale}}, not Wedgewood. [[User:Wilh3lm|Wilh3lm]] ([[User talk:Wilh3lm|talk]]) 01:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I still call the modern version of the "Celsius" scale "centigrade", but if people start nitpicking, I'm happy to switch to "Carolus" to avoid ambiguity. For some reason that tends to annoy people more though. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.191|172.68.22.191]] 01:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Every temperature scale is equally "random" as every other scale. People always say that Celsius is so much better because it's defined by the phase changes of water. Okay, cool...why should THAT of all things be what we use as the base for a system of temperature measurement? And, who cares? I'm a ''Homo sapiens'', not a water molecule. If anything we should use the freezing and melting points of humans as our two reference points for temperature (which, I must say, Fahrenheit approximates better than Celsius, assuming 0 and 100 are your points "A" and "B"). [[User:Pie Guy|Pie Guy]] ([[User talk:Pie Guy|talk]]) 03:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
: Every temperature scale is arbitrary, but since boiling and freezing water is a thing humans have a lot of experience with it makes sense to use that as the reference point. At least it makes more sense than whatever the coldest recorded temperature in Fahrenheit's home town was, because he didn't like negative numbers [[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.23|172.70.250.23]] 03:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
::Planck temperature (as above) is probably the least arbitrary, and some would say it is to some extent free from arbitrariness. However, it's completely impractical for everyday use (as above.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.138|172.69.34.138]] 04:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Do the physics of black holes or neutron stars involve Planck temperatures greater than 0.0000001? [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 07:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Chat Gippity told me:

:::::Black holes and neutron stars do not typically involve temperatures reaching the Planck scale. While both objects exhibit extreme physical conditions, their temperatures are far below the Planck temperature, even though they can be incredibly high compared to everyday phenomena.

::::: - **Neutron stars** have surface temperatures in the range of millions of Kelvin, and the core can reach even higher, possibly up to a few billion Kelvin. These temperatures are still vastly lower than the Planck temperature.

::::: - **Black holes**, especially the smaller ones, can emit Hawking radiation, with temperatures inversely proportional to their mass. However, the temperature of even a very small black hole is still far below the Planck temperature. Hawking radiation is not expected to reach temperatures close to the Planck scale under normal circumstances.

::::: The Planck temperature (TP=1) represents an energy scale so extreme that no known physical models, including those describing black holes and neutron stars, operate near or above this threshold. Temperatures reaching **0.0000001 TP** (or 1.416 × 10^26 K) would still be beyond current observational and theoretical frameworks related to these cosmic objects. A quantum theory of gravity would be required to describe physics at or near the Planck temperature, which remains speculative and is far beyond the conditions found in black holes or neutron stars.

::::[[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 08:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

If the °X scale is based on the temperatures of Earth from all time (for some definition of "Earth"), then the scale is very hard to define and highly impractical. The earth appears to have gotten to more than 2,300 Kelvin (hot enough to melt steel and platinum and to boil lead) and while I can't find any sources for the lowest temperature, I imagine it is lower than -100°C. The recorded minimum, maximum and average temperatures appear to be around -89.2 °C, 56.7 °C and 15 °C respectively. This would make the scale somewhat useful, but this would make typical values between 41 °X (cold winter's day) and 68 °X (hot summers day) which I think is pretty cursed. I recommend the clearly superior °Y, based around average temp at 0 °Y, low at -100 °Y and high at 100 °Y. These would be measured by the yearly high, low and mean temperatures averaged per person. Then saying "It's 2 times colder than yesterday" would have some reasonable meaning. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.236.147|198.41.236.147]] 04:01, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:"''Record'' ... surface temperature" implies it was recorded. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.9|172.68.22.9]] 04:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

How do you all feel about adding an additional column for room temperature 22C/72F?
{| class=wikitable style="text-align:right;"
! scope="col" | Unit
! scope="col" | Room temperature
|-
| Celsius || 22
|-
| Kelvin || 295
|-
| Fahrenheit || 72
|-
| Réaumur || 18
|-
| Rømer || 18
|-
| Rankine || 531
|-
| Newton || 7
|-
| Wedgwood || -7
|-
| Galen || 0
|-
| ''Real'' Celsius || 78
|-
| °X || 58
|}

Or 0.00000000000000000000000000000208 °Planck, lol. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.211|108.162.245.211]] 05:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:I feel like decigalens would be the most practical unit. Who's with me? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.5|162.158.186.5]] 06:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
::It's interesting; calculating the equilibrium temperature (with 2.05 and 4.24 being used for the heat capacities of ice and boiling water) gives 67... If I use water that's about to freeze and steam, I get 31. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.0.178|172.69.0.178]] 07:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Would you please explain in more detail? [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 09:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Question regarding the X scale - when it‘s defined by *three* (somewhat, implying average is real and not just calculated by (max-min)/2)) independent points, how will linearity be achieved? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.76|162.158.155.76]] 05:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
[[File:Explanation length.png|right|thumb|Or click "[Expand]" in the bottom right table cell Derivation.]]
:Please see [[2701: Change in Slope]]. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.179|172.70.206.179]] 05:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:Sure, "a linear scale between each point":
[[File:XvsC.png|thumb|left|Here you go. [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 06:33, 22 October 2024 (UTC)]]
{{clear}}

The reference for the average surface temperature, https://www.space.com/17816-earth-temperature.html, suggests it has increased above 15°C. What value should we use in late 2024? [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 07:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:The [https://wmo.int/media/news/earth-experiences-warmest-day-recent-history World Meteorological Organization], [https://www.carbonbrief.org/state-of-the-climate-2024-now-very-likely-to-be-warmest-year-on-record/ Carbon Brief], and [https://climate.copernicus.eu/new-record-daily-global-average-temperature-reached-july-2024 Copernicus Climate Change Service] suggest 17.16°C. [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 07:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
::Updated water temperatures, Derivation, and graph. So we've already had more than the +2°C warming we were trying to avoid in 2019? [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 08:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Regarding [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=3001%3A_Temperature_Scales&type=revision&diff=353635&oldid=353632], are the average surface temperatures from the sources supposed to be yearly or overall averages? [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 09:06, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

where is the interactive epic 3000 comic we should've gotten? This one's cool but 1000 seemed to have more effort in it and 2000 was at least tangetially related. Does Randall just not like making these anymore and is only making more comics as a business? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.185|108.162.238.185]] 12:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
:The comic is free on the website and it doesn't have ads; although the comic is part of his "brand" there are many more profitable things he could be doing with his time, and yet he continues to update it every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. I just don't like the idea of claiming that a creative person "should" produce any particular thing to satisfy their fans. He's a busy guy! Maybe he's working on a book, or a Scientific American article, or a TV show. He's under no obligation to give us anything, and maybe one day he'll stop making xkcd altogether; that's his choice. Sorry to single you out; I know a lot of people feel the same way as you do, but to me it doesn't make sense. He's not a content machine--he's a guy who started posting sketches on the internet. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Is this the first list-style comic where every single entry is real? (Usually he has several joke entries.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.182|172.70.114.182]] 14:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2992: UK Coal

2024-09-30T21:35:51Z

Dextrous Fred: Comment about watership down

nuclear power is better in all aspects anyway [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.105|172.70.90.105]] 19:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Here before the explanation :) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.9|172.71.154.9]] 20:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I made an initial explanation, but it needs a lot of work still; hopefully someone with more experience editing on this wiki can improve it (this is my first explanation) [[User:MathEnthusiast|MathEnthusiast]] ([[User talk:MathEnthusiast|talk]]) 20:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

: the sole rabbit-run coal plant was shut down in the 1990s. [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 20:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Just checking, but this isn't referencing some particularly egregious, badly managed coal power plant in the U.K., is it? [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 20:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:I don’t think so; I believe it’s simply that Ratcliffe-on-Soar power plant is the last UK coal plant to be shut down.

Randal uses SI units in the formula, as every person with the tiniest bit of tech/science education would, but then gives the result in inches (3.15) instead of centimeters (8.0). Americans are weird. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.110.162|162.158.110.162]] 20:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

:^^ This!

One should not forget that the 3 inches are very unevenly distributed. Some areas on top of coal mines have sunken in much further creating new flooding risks that require continued future interventions.
--[[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.34|172.64.236.34]] 21:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand that Watership Down is sometimes categorized as "children's literature", but it always catches me off guard. The Wikipedia page for it calls it an "adventure novel" and it's in the adult fiction section at my library. I'm just wondering if perhaps the explanation here should be a little less specific in its categorization of the book.[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 21:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2879: Like This One

2024-01-12T17:09:12Z

Dextrous Fred: Minor comment

i'm very confused what "this gas molecule" or "this skin microbe" is meant to be; it doesn't seem like there would contextually be an obvious specific instance of either of those classes? looking forward to seeing the conjecture given in the explanation when it settles down - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 02:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:I believe it's referring to her holding her hand out to signify a (large number of) gas molecules. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.49|172.69.34.49]] 02:55, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
::ahh, what she meant was "like these ones"--ok, I understand what both would mean now. - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 03:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:::She's pointing at one molecule. Just because you can't pick it out of the mass doesn't change that. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:55, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:::: Indeed. And one wouldn't want to get the wrong idea about ''which'' molecule she might study. Obviously, there are a lot of N2 ones, and a few O2s, but they're not necessarily of interest. The odd noble gas atom (if that counts as a molecule-of-one) or CO2 would probably be the more useful, along with SO2 / O3 / other trace ones as what she might be indicating. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.79|141.101.99.79]] 05:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::In my head-canon, she's using her stick-figure hand to point out an exceedingly long nitrogen nanotube that she's manufactured. Could be interpreted as a threatening gesture, I suppose?
:::::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 16:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
: I think that's the whole joke - such statements are inevitably true, but at the same time essentially meaningless. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.140|172.70.86.140]] 16:49, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Other possible instances would include "Hominids" and "False vacuums". I was sure it was going to end with, "Cartoons like this one." [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:55, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
: Also, neutrinos would go on the list [[Special:Contributions/172.68.144.217|172.68.144.217]] 10:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

"I'm a researcher studying potential apocalyptic events..." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.115|172.70.90.115]] 09:40, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Hmm. I’m a criminologist studying the behavior patterns of psychopaths.
::But wait, is the 'this one' referring to you, or me...? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.50|172.71.178.50]] 16:04, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

"I'm a researcher studying computer simulations…" (sadly, not actually the kind we are (maybe) living in but close enough) [[User:Brycemw|Brycemw]] ([[User talk:Brycemw|talk]]) 14:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

"I'm a researcher studying research topics..." [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

"I study logical paradoxes..." (¿"...like this one"?) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.180|172.69.43.180]] 15:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:"I study self-referential statements..." [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 17:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

"I'm a biologist studying key turning points in human evolution... like this one!" "Man - that is the worst pick-up line..."[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.71|172.70.90.71]] 16:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

"I study mathematical integers... like this 1." [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 20:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

"I study human comments..." --Anonymous

"I study traditional pub signs, like The Swan" [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.55|172.71.178.55]] 09:32, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:Is ‘The Swan’ perhaps owned by [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Gnome_Ann Gnome Ann] (at least in this hypothetical)? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.1.131|172.68.1.131]] 14:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

"Skin microbes" seems a bit (intentionally?) obscure, especially since, it seems to me, the closest a modern microbiologist gets to an actual bacterium is its Illumina lane. "Skin lesions", however (warts, moles, calluses, liver spots, eczema/psoriasis, melanoma, yada) ... Of course, this might only occur to audiences of [ahem] a certain age (cue Rod Stewart's/Bob Dylan's "Forever Young" ...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.207.186|172.70.207.186]] 21:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

”I’m a linguist studying languages”, and “I’m a student studying fictional works” also are kinda funny. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.1.130|172.68.1.130]] 15:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

== Do we really want to break down each bullet point? ==

We could probably do well to simplify it to just something saying the list contains things immediately surrounding the characters, part of their bodies, or intangible ideas commonly employed during normal conversation. It probably doesn't need to explain what sound waves are, for instance --[[User:Raviolio|Raviolio]] ([[User talk:Raviolio|talk]]) 15:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:If breaking them all down, perhaps better a simple table rather than each 'hanging off' a bullet-point. But then we're more committed to breaking them ''all'' down (including Title Text) with potentially several paragraphs per 'explanation column cell'. (My preference, this moment, would be to restore the simple bullet-list then follow with the "air molecules" expansion below in regular prose, perhaps briefly zoom through the others in a single para to follow that, if not just wikilink those and leave to be checked at will. But that's just based upon what the current text might best be formatted as.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.180|172.69.43.180]] 15:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
::The long exploration of exactly what interpretation of 'like' should be placed on Ponytail's remark that's currently attached to the bullet point seems rather peripheral to the joke. If anything ought to be explained, it's why each thing would (a) always be present (or at least, with rare exceptions like being in a spacecraft in deep space), but also (b) not be usefully identified by the remark.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.36|172.69.194.36]] 16:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2824: Abstract Pickup

2023-09-05T15:03:45Z

Dextrous Fred: Typo, sorry

... nobody has anything to say? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 02:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
: self explanatory [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.144|172.69.22.144]] 02:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
: we just dont like pickup artists, not much more to say - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 03:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

: I do: I think it is weird it is White Hat who performs the pickup-artistry on the abstract painting. Given the character traits, shouldn't we expect Black Hat? --[[Special:Contributions/172.64.238.101|172.64.238.101]] 12:52, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
:: I get the impression that, while Black Hat has terrifying and misanthropic tendencies, mere pickup artistry is beneath him. He is, after all, a ''classhole''. I think White Hat (also rarely a sympathetic character) is being used because the casual jerkiness and disrespect (even in a slightly surreal scenario) would cheapen Black Hat's brand.[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

: I suspect the US holiday on Monday had a large portion of editors busy with festivities. Editing will likely pickup today! (See what I did there?) [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 12:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2824: Abstract Pickup

2023-09-05T15:03:17Z

Dextrous Fred: Adding a comment

... nobody has anything to say? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 02:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
: self explanatory [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.144|172.69.22.144]] 02:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
: we just dont like pickup artists, not much more to say - [[User:Vaedez|Vaedez]] ([[User talk:Vaedez|talk]]) 03:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

: I do: I think it is weird it is White Hat who performs the pickup-artistry on the abstract painting. Given the character traits, shouldn't we expect Black Hat? --[[Special:Contributions/172.64.238.101|172.64.238.101]] 12:52, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
:: I get the impression that, while Black Hat has terrifying and misanthropic tendencies, that mere pickup artistry is beneath him. He is, after all, a ''classhole''. I think White Hat (also rarely a sympathetic character) is being used because the casual jerkiness and disrespect (even in a slightly surreal scenario) would cheapen Black Hat's brand.[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

: I suspect the US holiday on Monday had a large portion of editors busy with festivities. Editing will likely pickup today! (See what I did there?) [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 12:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2818: Circuit Symbols

2023-08-22T15:18:16Z

Dextrous Fred: Response to comment

The direct link to the comic is getting a 404 error. But it appears at the xkcd.com home page. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 01:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
:The link is working now. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 02:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Randall is symbolizing sheep with a coil because ... wool takes a helical shape. See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wool#/media/File:Royal_Winter_Fair_Wool.jpg. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 02:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The title text is probably a reference to the classic novella "The Scarlet Letter" by Nathaniel Hawthorne (a common classroom reading in the US). In this novella, a young Puritan woman "sins" by having a child out of wedlock. She is punished by having to wear the letter A (for adultery). [[User:Comsmomf|Comsmomf]] ([[User talk:Comsmomf|talk]]) 02:54, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Can someone with more wiki-foo than me please put the actual images for the symbols in a new first column? [[User:Blackbearnh|Blackbearnh]] ([[User talk:Blackbearnh|talk]]) 03:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I tried, unsuccessfully, to learn if there were "Scarlet Letters" that represented other sins ['A' is mentioned to be for 'Adultery', Maybe 'O' for Onanism?] [[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]]) 03:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
:From what I understand, ‘BJ’ had its fair share of supporters. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.247|172.70.210.247]] 04:47, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

What exactly does "the opposite of capacitors" mean in this context? I'm not that familiar with EE, but from my limited understanding of inductors this is an incorrect and confusing statement. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.79|172.70.126.79]] 08:07, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

:They are the conjugate complex (so the sentence is kind of half-true), if you consider complex impedances. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.169|172.68.110.169]] 08:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

:Behaviorally the description makes sense, capacitors behave the same way regarding voltage vs. current as inductors behave regarding current vs. voltage and vice versa. Capacitors can "instantaneously" allow a spike in the current flowing through the circuit path that they are placed in, while the voltage across a capacitor can't change instantaneously and requires time to change incrementally (with a corresponding decline over time in the current flowing). Inductors "instantaneously" allow the voltage across their terminals to spike, but the current flowing through it can't change instantaneously and requires time to change incrementally (with a corresponding decline in the voltage across the inductor). Capacitors can act as a sort of "shock absorber" (no pun intended) or low-pass frequency filter for voltages, as inductors can for current. So they are very much considered complementary and the "essentially the opposite of capacitors" comment does pretty much make sense to EEs. But yes, it's not a particularly illuminating description without that background, and the description isn't really valid regarding their physical makeup or what makes them tick, just their role in a circuit. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.213|172.71.146.213]] 09:32, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The "overpass" is troubling me, as a map fan. Dependant upon the conventions of any given map illustrator this could easily be more an ''underpass'' (main road being the || track, lesser track being the — that sneaks beneath it) or a 'green bridge' (road is the — and the bridge 'symbol' is the || with no actual route using the space between its edges) or a minor road intersection of an uncrossable dual carriageway (each || is a directional way, separated by central reservation, and a historic road/lane is given T-junction access to/from the adjacent direction of travel, but no local flyover to access the opposite continuation/direction, probably have to use other flyovers/turning points above and below this snapshot). Or it's just a regular major/minor crossroads (track-level horizontal/E-W, more main road vertically/N-S) and is entirely at-grade so not involving a bridge at all. But all very much will repy upon the publisher's/renderer's choice of map-symbolism. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.95|172.70.91.95]] 11:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

:What's your hope? That Randall will edit his comic? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 11:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
:I appreciated the map trivia, personally [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2816: Types of Solar Eclipse

2023-08-18T16:54:01Z

Dextrous Fred: Response to comment

Is the annular eclipse actually possible? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.118|162.158.78.118]] 21:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/eclipses/2023/oct-14-annular/where-when/ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.7|172.69.33.7]] 21:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I interpret the Hug Eclipse as the sun wrapping around the moon giving it a hug, rather than the moon being pinched in on the sides. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.62|172.70.211.62]] 21:38, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
:I amended that (twice, first time got blitzed in an Edit Conflict situation), when I thought of a better way (two slightly different better ways! ...might not even have used the better one, in instance #2) to describe it. But I rushed a bit anyway... I can see typos. (Not including the likes of "centre", which is not a typo but me defaulting to British English by default; though no doubt that 'needs' changing too.)
:I'm still wondering if just "label" and "description" columns are needed (image details can be recycled into Transcript, per label). Or if it could be ";header" and ":...description" without the table, but I think it looks no worse than I had feared, as the current table form. Of course, others have added more prosaic explanation paragraphs, so I'll let it sit a while. Almost certainly the other active editors here are going to have ideas about how to merge/expunge my efforts, and I'll let them copyedit my errors/'errors' as well. But at least there's a framework answer (or several) now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.179|172.70.162.179]] 22:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

That must be a VERY scary dragonite. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.153|172.71.26.153]] 02:20, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
: I think I need an explain XKCD for the dragonite reference in the bot joke... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.160|172.70.210.160]] 16:49, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
:: Looks like it was originally [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2816:_Types_of_Solar_Eclipse&diff=next&oldid=321046 just a dragon] (consistent with various actual eclipse-myths). I'm not so sure whether it became a Pokemon creature (does that have Sun-eating capabilities?), which seems to be the main searchable reference, or something even less known to me. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.63|172.70.86.63]] 17:17, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
::: Presumably it's a dragon which has survived its atmospheric entry and landed on the earth's surface.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.219|172.70.85.219]] 16:10, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

I love this community, which will explain how a solar panel works and why the moon cannot give the sun a hug with the same level of rigor and detail. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.40|172.69.247.40]] 04:26, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
:Arguably, the Sun is constantly hugging the Moon, through the warming arms of the Solar Winds.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.39|172.70.86.39]] 16:15, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

I have always wondered about solar eclipses... does anybody else think it's really weird that the Earth is not just the only planet with exactly the right ratios of star/satellite size/distance to make eclipses happen, but is also the only planet (so far as we know) where there's an evolved intelligence that can appreciate such a phenomenon? After all, a similar effect viewable only from Mars or Venus would be totally wasted... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.161|172.70.91.161]] 06:35, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
: It is indeed a weird thing. We don't know if it is a weird thing that is of significance for life or intelligence or civilisation, or if it is just a happenstance weird thing. The universe has all kinds of weird things. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.22|162.158.74.22]] 07:22, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
: "Right place, right time". It helps that we have a Moon roughly the same (angular) size of the Sun, which seems rare, but if we didn't know it was a thing then we might not miss the coincidence. And, because of the slightly drifting Moon, at some time in the past (tens/hundreds of millions of years ago), we never had annular eclipses – but then very few people appreciated that. In another few millions of years, we'll lose all possibility of total eclipses (imagine being there to witness that last one, everyone who makes effort to be there cramming into the short stretch of 'final, brief totality' in the literally-ultimate hybrid eclipse...).
: On human scales, it's a fairly wide window that may very well out-spread the full reach of humanity (in fact, I'd bet on it, but do feel free to try to collect if we're both there jostling for room in that 'last eclipse sweet-spot' viewing platform). But imagine all the other astronomical co-inky-dinks that we ''might'' have witnessed if humanity were significantly shifted by time (and place) in the universe. Instead of "very edge of totality" eclipses, who knows what else might have been (surprisingly-)'normal'... Or at least totally different (not-)Earth (not-)Moon (not-)Sun eclipse combinations that are right-sized just like ours is. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.69|172.70.91.69]] 08:49, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
::postscript: of course, if large moons (created like ours was supposed to be) had to be settled down enough to allow life (after the Thea-like impact) but significant enough to cause tides (variously theorised as driving the chemical creation of life, if not the later development of advanced life forms or even the prerequisites of civilisation leading to scientific enquiry) then ''perhaps'' the chances of any equivalent beings to ourselves having any equivalent eclipses to what we see is slightly raised above that of 'any random planet with or without appreciative audience'. But, until we get very good at surveying exoplanetary systems (if we ever do) and/or visit them ourselves (ditto, with bells on), it'll be hard to quantify any inherant tendency to serve such things up on a platter to all those who might appreciate it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.69|172.70.91.69 (again)]] 09:07ish, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
: I don't understand your 'evolved intelligence'. Whether planet that has intelligence is very not-correlated with its capacity to create eclipses. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.36|172.69.71.36]] 18:40, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
:: SFAIK, there's no evidence from which to base ''any'' kind of correlation/non-correlation/anti-correlation between intelligence and eclipses, given that we have only one instance of a planet with intelligence upon it to study (and we might even learn of further eclipse-worthy planets well before we do of intelligence-populated ones). Speculative reasoning can try to fill in gaps, maybe (see just above), as long as one realises it's wild-ass-guessing. But, luckily, the thing you're replying to doesn't even try to suggest that by any reasonable reading of it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.65|172.71.242.65]] 21:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

By the time you see the cuboid eclipse, it's already too late. Resistance is futile.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 23:52, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Given that [https://socratic.org/questions/why-is-earth-s-moon-spherical the moon is slightly oblate], would an oblate eclipse be possible when the angular sizes of the moon and sun are almost the same? [[User:Ehusmark|EHusmark]] ([[User talk:Ehusmark|talk]]) 09:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
:A good question, but the diagram shows the sun as being oblate, so I don't think the intention was to reference the slight (but real) oblate nature of the moon. Good catch, though. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 16:54, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

2798: Room Temperature

2023-07-05T21:37:03Z

Dextrous Fred: Adding a relevant link

{{comic
| number = 2798
| date = July 5, 2023
| title = Room Temperature
| image = room_temperature_2x.png
| imagesize = 299x352px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They're also refusing to fund my device that demonstrates uncontrolled hot fusion.
}}

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

Semiconductors are a common electronic component of many modern day devices including computers. Most computers have heat sinks, because semiconductors generate heat when operating and don’t work when they are too hot. However, [[Cueball]] has “discovered” a semiconductor that works in normal temperatures, which already exists, so this “discovery” is not useful to anyone. The second layer to this joke is the current hunt for room temperature superconductors, which would be a huge boon to the advancement of quantum computers, as most superconductors are predominantly only superconducting at 70 Kelvin or below.

In the title text, he is talking about a device that produces “uncontrollable hot fusion”. This is also known as a [[wikipedia:thermonuclear weapon| thermonuclear weapon]]. In reality, “cold fusion” is theoretically a way to produce lots of cheap energy, which many people would be interested in and has received significant research funding as a way to provide environmentally-safe energy for humanity. Again, in proposing something that sounds new he has “invented” something that already exists.

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

{{comic discussion}}

User:Dextrous Fred

2023-05-15T20:55:26Z

Dextrous Fred: Creating my one-sentence bio

Just an xkcd fan here to browse and occasionally contribute.

Talk:2775: Siphon

2023-05-15T17:18:27Z

Dextrous Fred: Just a note to a community member

My understanding was that siphoning can essentially be explained by the Bernoulli equation? There is a difference in potential energy between the upper and lower container so it flows. The weight of water in the downhill part of the tube pulls water up the uphill section of the tube (think like a vacuum), and so on until there's either no difference in head or no more water. Siphoning will work with any diameter tube. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.151|172.70.91.151]] 15:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
:That's right. The only mention of capillary action in the siphon wikipedia article is when talking about phenomenon that *isn't* a siphon. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:15, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Agree, capillary action does not seem to be referenced or implied in the comic, presenting only the (not "functioning") siphon phenomenon. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.134.142|172.68.134.142]] 16:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
:Seconded/thirded. Capillary action isn't even what they were expecting. The small amount of water in the lowe receptical indicates they correctly ''filled'' the tube, but then as the longer length drained it did not then induce further flow up and over through the shorter length. e.g. nature no longer abhored the resulting vacuum (or there was increased negative-pressure vapourisation, beyond that previously expected, or other method of seepage 'airlock'-breaking) and thus the short-end also drained straight back out again instead of becoming a potentially self-sustaining inflow to the whole siphoning setup.
::If the upper end got restricted (say by touching the side of the bucket) the loss of flow would allow air to enter the bottom end and drain out the tube. I've done this. :-( [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
:::Indeed, even having an especially large diameter "tube" (/pipe etc) can allow air from the bottom to flow up to the peak & break the siphon effect. For reliable results, the lower end needs to be kept immersed or the hose needs to be relatively small in diameter. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:11, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
:While the capilliary action element ''could'' induce the start of a rather limited 'empty' siphon setup to start (maybe, I'd have doubts about the 'fluid friction' actually acting against the gravity-feed part, once the surface-tension bit has "climbed the mountain" and started to merely seep out of the other end, almost incidentally, for a sufficiently thin tubing where CA is a significant factor), this suddenly failing for whatever reason (surface-tension effects being nullified) wouldn't then send a token amount of water into the low bucket, nor particularly stop unrelated siphon-flow from continuing properly (in fact, suddenly 'interaction-free' liquid and tubing might siphon ''faster'', with effectively zero fluid boundary effects dragging on the induced flow).
:But perhaps someone with more QFD experience could explain where my assessment is wrong. So not going to personally rewrite the current Explanation intro just now. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.161|172.70.162.161]] 16:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
:I'd like to contribute as one more data point. I also don't see capillary action as being relevant. In particular, as another commenter said, the water in the lower bucket quite clearly supports the idea that the siphon effect was the subject of the characters' confusion. How else is Randall supposed to depict the siphon effect anyway? I agree that the drawing alone ''could'' also suggest capillary action is what's being investigated, but I don't think it suggests that the caption has ''incorrectly'' referred to it as the siphon effect. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.254.100|172.71.254.100]] 18:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Of course, if some physical law would actually stop working, people wouldn't be confused. They would drop dead. Due to physical laws working on level of elementary particles, every change would have lot of different effects ... and living organism live only thanks to being very carefully balanced in lot of regards. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 20:49, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Bug report 6EQUJ5: Odd signal emitted from Sagittarius constellation. Status: Closed - could not reproduce. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.69|172.71.26.69]] 03:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
:(I get that reference... :) However, launching off that to say: ) There's an old (short?) story... H.G. Wells era, possibly, but not him I think... where someone (who happened to be the first decent but amateur astronomer to get a cloudless patch of sky, one night) realises the Moon is in the wrong place, and the news then reaches (and troubles) the professional community who get a chance to observe/notice the change for the first fime and confirm it.. A 'glitch' seems to have passed through space and moved/retimed it, for a limited time, before it later snaps back to where (in the orbit) it now should be.
:The trace of the glitch are seen further afield (implying a 'beam' of 'wrongness'), and ultimately it spawns something like Experimental Theology whereby observations of such clear "hand of the Creator" changes (implying we're essentially in a simulated universe being operated by a 'universal programmer', but in pre-computer terms) merge or muddy the boundaries between scientific rationalism (which clearly falls short) and religious philosophy (where undeniable 'proof' of something godlike is now suddenly an ironically confounding factor).
:Cannot remember much about where I read it, I may be presuming some details about it that aren't actually there (even removing obvious mix-ups with similar brands of tale) and my Google-Fu fails to establish any obvious online reference to it (even just title+synoposis), so instead I'm setting down the 'spoilers' without reservation. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.151|172.70.91.151]] 13:04, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Siphoning is NOT because of capillary action! That should be changed!! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.90|172.70.127.90]] 15:35, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I guess I was wrong that siphons work because of capillary action. [[User:TianHanFei|TianHanFei]] ([[User talk:TianHanFei|talk]]) 1:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

::As someone who's been publicly wrong here before, it can be stressful, but if it's any consolation, you're one of today's (probably much fewer than) 10,000: https://xkcd.com/1053/ -- thanks for having a sense of humor about it [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 17:18, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

== Potential inspiration ==

One potential source of inspiration for this comic is the Twitter [https://twitter.com/earth_updates account @Earth_Updates], which produces a lot of similar content. [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 19:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I think if I added it to the article body it would get reverted, but the content seems very similar to how AI media produced delusional worlds for so many factions of people. It is not at all a big stretch to imagine people stepping into a metaverse or matrix where they aren’t sure what is real and physical laws match their intuition more than is actually correct. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.171|162.158.158.171]] 08:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

== Title text ==

Isn't the title text about stars like our sun rather than about plutonium? [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.95|198.41.242.95]] 00:55, 13 May 2023 (UTC)h
:Seems to me unlikely that anyone would refer to stars as 'rocks'.[[User:Catherine|Catherine]] ([[User talk:Catherine|talk]]) 02:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
::There is Slate that turn into lava spontaneously after lying around for thousands of years. I think the area they are in is called "Smoking Hills". There was recent research why that slate does this while in much the rest of the world slate is just flat, black rocks. I still believe this title text is about plutonium, though, as that slate produces so much heat, that one still hasn't managed to measure how hot it gets - but it produces that heat not for an near-infinite duration.--[[User:Gunterkoenigsmann|Gunterkoenigsmann]] ([[User talk:Gunterkoenigsmann|talk]]) 01:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
:::The only {{w|Smoking Hills}} that came to mind was natural shale-fires (chemical burning, and not hot enough for remelting to magma/lava.
:::Possibly there is a {{w|natural nuclear fission reactor|situation}} where it has done as you say (in some natural mass of rock, spotted somewhere in this planet's lithosphere, or elsewhere out there), but given the fine line between nicely sustaining and runaway chain-reactions, I'm not sure how easy it is for nature to 'engineer' a way to land on the {{w|Corium (nuclear reactor)|middle ground}} and not go supercritical.
:::In order for accumulating ores to not just start a low-level fizzle (as above), over millenia, you might need separate ore-patches either side of a fault to come together in a suddenish techtonic slip, rather than a slow buckling of layers to increase effective ore-densities. And then you've got earthquakes, already, so not sure if the very low-grade nuclear explosion that is awfully close to being possible in this chance contrived example (at one end of the probability curve, unless U238 content is somehow preferentially leached out?) is going to be noticable.
:::But ''just'' hot enough for lava? If not already close to melting, anyway, under local temperatures and pressures? Not sure we've seen anything like it, even if it is technically feasible given enough happenstance setups by geology(/exo-geology), since planets formed. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.152|172.70.91.152]] 09:16, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

== Title Text-Radiation ==

The title text is referring to the heat created by natural radioactive decay, not humans harnessing it in reactors.

The literal rocks of particularly radioactive elements still in the ground are constantly producing small amounts of heat without our assistance

[[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.48|172.71.151.48]] 06:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

2775: Siphon

2023-05-12T19:47:36Z

Dextrous Fred: Cleaned up a sentence

{{comic
| number = 2775
| date = May 12, 2023
| title = Siphon
| image = siphon_2x.png
| imagesize = 310x378px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = ADDITIONAL NOTES: Fixed a bug that caused some rocks to generate virtually infinite heat while just sitting there.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a SIPHONIC WINDS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Cueball and Megan have a demonstration of a {{w|Siphon}}, by which the gravitational force on an upper reservoir of liquid and molecular cohesion move a liquid upward through a tube, traversing a higher peak to reach a lower exit. Randall has also mentioned siphons in his book, "how to," section "how to make a pool."

Siphons are commonly used in modern society (e.g., American toilets are flushed by siphon action).

Siphons are separate from a similarly counterintuitive phenomenon of {{w|capillary action}}, where a liquid flows through narrow spaces, usually upwards (against gravity) in that a siphon can be of much larger diameter and capillary action can move liquid up an initially empty channel.

Apparently, even though Cueball and Megan have probably set up the experiment correctly, the water no longer demonstrates a siphon by flowing from the upper bucket to the lower. Cueball observes in surprise that "it's true," meaning that this is a very recent development, and Megan remarks that it was honestly weird in retrospect that scientists had ever tried to rationalise this admittedly counterintuitive phenomenon in the first place.

The punchline of the comic is in the caption, which delivers a piece of physics news that the "2023 update to the universe" finally fixed this phenomenon, dubbed "the siphon bug". The joke here is that the entire complex and multifaceted system of {{w|physics}} in and of itself is treated as though it's simply the logic (or perhaps the [[1620: Christmas Settings|officially maintained configuration]]) to a video game, and that capillary action (rather than being an interesting physical phenomenon worth studying) was nothing more than a bug unintentionally created by the "devs" (whoever that may be). In reality, capillary action still very much exists in our universe,{{citation needed}} though {{w|simulation hypothesis|the idea that we live in a computer simulation}} is also prevalent in {{w|the matrix|our modern pop culture}}.

The title text is a reference to [[2115: Plutonium]]. It expands on the joke surrounding the idea of an "Earth dev log" by referencing {{w|nuclear power}}, and how it's apparently another bug that some nuclear elements (notably {{w|uranium}} and {{w|plutonium}}, among others) can be and have been harnessed by humanity in order to generate virtually infinite amounts of energy, all while the elements themselves are simply sitting there in the core of some {{w|nuclear reactor}}.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[There are two jugs, the one on the left is on a stool and is filled with water, the other on the right is on the ground and has a small amount of water. Cueball standing on the left is holding a tube between the jugs, no water is flowing through it. Megan standing on the right is watching.]
:Cueball: Wow, it's true—the water doesn't flow up the tube anymore.
:Megan: Honestly, it's weird that it ever did.
:Megan: Why did we think that was normal?

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Physics news: The 2023 update to the universe finally fixed the "siphon" bug.

{{comic discussion}}

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

Talk:2736: Only Serifs

2023-02-13T19:55:38Z

Dextrous Fred: Signing

first two letters are "A" and "R" I think [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.10|172.71.167.10]] 04:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Bumpf

It's AaBbCcDd. Most likely in Caslon, based on the uppercase A. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.149|172.68.174.149]] 04:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

So much for a hidden message. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.238.22|172.68.238.22]] 05:05, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

If we've come to this page for an explanation, we probably don't know what a "solum-serif font" is. update the transcript with something more widely known? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.65.224|172.69.65.224]] 05:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:Agreed, enthusiastically! Someone trying to show off, Google doesn't even know what it means, it found ONE result, which is a font of curved corners someone made (when I put "solum-serif" in quotes, to not allow Google to just search one or the other). But while I was Googling someone fixed it before I could, LOL! Which is weird as it's past midnight here in the Eastern time zone. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:: Perhaps you haven't realised that nighttime for Americans is daytime for, um, somewhere around 80-90% of the world's population? [[User:Paddles|Paddles]] ([[User talk:Paddles|talk]]) 14:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
::: Of course I realize this. :) Seems like YOU don't realize that this site is one of many where it seems like most activity centers around the EST time zone... Perhaps related to Randall being in this time zone, perhaps not, but I'm usually alone at this time of night (for example, I almost NEVER get Edit Conflicts because seemingly everyone is asleep). For years I'm almost always the only person making contributions at this hour. Maybe think of that before making a misguided condescending reply. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::::You really live up to your username, eh? Charming ''and'' US-centric.

::I think that's probably because it was a joke. In fact the ridiculous of the notion of a "solum-serif" font is more or less the entirety of the joke of this comic. You're right, in the future we should make sure that these descriptions are devoid of humor.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.92|172.70.211.92]] 18:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:::But that's in the transcript particularly, the transcript should make sense as to what the image shows without prior knowledge [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.10|108.162.216.10]] 02:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Yes, as Mr./Ms. 216.10 pointed out, this was the transcript. PLENTY of room for jokes in the Explanation, but the Transcript should be as concise and straightforward as possible, in an effort to be clear. NOT the place for what seemed to be a self-coined term and trying to be clever. :) I've heard some blind and sight-impaired people follow the comic by having a reading program read these Transcripts, last thing they need is a non-word the program might trip over and can't define for them. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::::Exactly the transcript should not try to explain the comic. But should include all text as written text for later possibility to search for it. And finally the image should be described in some detail for those that are sight impaired. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::For anyone who is confused, 'solum' (solus) is Latin for 'only', as opposed to 'sans' (from the Latin 'sine'), without. I suppose the joke is rather hard to get, though, since the top Google search results for 'solum' refer to soil. (Not my joke, by the way. Also, first ever comment - hope I've done this right.) [[User:CryptekCathekh|CryptekCathekh]] ([[User talk:CryptekCathekh|talk]]) 21:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the clarification, yes that makes sense. And yes, finely commented there. :) Yes, I got loads of industrial results for "Solum", which is why I had to force the search to include the "serif". [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

There was a whole thing on Wikipedia about formatting the f symbol for an arbitrary function. One camp held that f is just f, it always is and always was and if you italicize f in a san-serif font, you get an oblique ''f'' but if you italicize f in a serif font, you get a proper italic version, which I'm not sure how to display here. The italic f resembles ƒ, a character called the "hooked f," which is technically an oblique f with a descender ("hook"). That symbol has been used for florins, but sometimes it is also used to imitate the italic f to represent functions, because it has the descender in all environments. But Wikipedia uses a san-serif script, while most mathematical literature uses a serif script. However, it renders expressions in LaTeX with serif fonts and therefore these equations get an f with a descender. So some people were arguing that given this environment, the ƒ character was practically superior, even if it was conceptually wrong, because it most closely resembled the formatted LaTeX expressions. And on and on with the back and forth. I'm glad they eventually settled on just using f for f, like they use g for g and h for h, but still, it was amusingly nitpicky. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.100.50|172.70.100.50]] 07:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:What you listed as resembling italic f looks on my system like ⨍. There are lots of fun variations (some unrelated, just similar looking): ∫⨎ʄ∮∬∰⨏ƒʆᶘᔑ [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 08:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:That entire argument seems silly. Obviously the correct answer to "how do you write the function $f$ outside of math mode" is "don't". Just use math mode and let KaTeX handle the formatting. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.61|162.158.63.61]] 16:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

The title text teases the idea of a font made by adding the Times New Roman serifs to Comic Sans, and now I actually want to see such a cursed font. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.237|108.162.241.237]] 11:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:Ask and ye shall receive: [[File:2736MovedSerifsV2.jpg]] :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::Is it weird that I kind of like Sans New Roman? (anonymous) 12:49, 13 February 2023 (EST)
::Thanks I will include this in the explanation. Great work. Ugly as hell ;-) It might send some graphic designers your way! ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I think Caslon is correct:
[https://ibb.co/J2WhP1g Caslon] [https://ibb.co/MG77JMX Overlay] [https://ibb.co/3yQtqbN Low Opacity Overlay]
via [http://www.identifont.com/identify?58+.+5J+1JU+3YB+3RZ+35YX+94+JIA+58C+97+22X+8R8+1JY+2Z3A+6ZR+3Q+5BU+9J+1L0+76P+8Z+1QN+7UF+DG+5QE+J+JPK+8C+99+PAE+2AA6+2ZI+8X+8W+8J+1KS+JI6+2Z36+79+8E+53K+2E+1KI+8N+7VS+7S+2C6+1U6+8A+8R0+8F+3WO+2ZGL+1LA+7G+1QY+8B+A0 questions] in Identifont. If someone can add these to the wiki, please do. [[User:DragonDave|DragonDave]] ([[User talk:DragonDave|talk]]) 12:55 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I wonder if this is related to the US State Department dropping Times Roman in favor of Calibri, under the argument that the latter is easier to read. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.198|172.70.114.198]] 13:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I call these fonts seul serif, keeping with the theme of using French terminology. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.59|172.71.147.59]] 16:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

A free, existing example of [http://www.fontgrill.com/fonts/free/comic-serif/comic-serif.php Comic Serif].
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.242|172.70.214.242]] 16:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

:^ TBH Comic Serif doesn't look half bad, if only it had a consistent baseline [[Special:Contributions/198.41.231.179|198.41.231.179]] 17:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:Of course, since Comic is supposed to mimic casual handwriting, and people don't hand write serifs {{Citation needed}}, this messes up the concept, LOL! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::Does not, if you go back far enough. Remember that a lot of old handwriting had serif-like parts due to the use of quills.
:::True enough, but going back isn't appropriate, as computers '''''AREN'T''''' "back far enough", or at all. :) NOW, in the present day, nobody handwrites serifs. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

This comic reminds me of something I once actually did as a child: I once wrote a notepad full of game ideas and story concepts but wanted to keep them a secret; so I created my own "cipher" font where any straight lines in letters were removed, leaving only the curved lines. However, because some letters such as c and d would look similar without the straight lines, I gave some letters curved "serifs", which would be retained in my "font". --Jinji@donphan.social 20:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm most instances where the word "font" is used, the correct word is "typeface". "Times Roman" is a typeface whereas "Times Roman bold" is a font. -Jez [[Special:Contributions/172.70.93.42|172.70.93.42]] 20:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:I'd be inclined to suggest that "font", in common parlance, means what everyone here means it to mean, and that means that it is "correct". Nobody - OK, fine, potentially a negligible number of people - might wonder what's going on when "font" is used where you would prefer "typeface". It's not a matter of being "correct" though, unless we are (and we aren't) a community of people using typesetting language in a formal, technical sense. You know what ''is'' incorrect though? Writing "I'm" when you mean "In". Would I have said any of that had you not been so pedantic? You bet your sweet ass I wouldn't.[[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 22:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::Yorkshire Pudding there said everything I was tempted to and more last night, but said better than I would have. Thank you! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

That can't POSSIBLY be the right link under the word "events". We have an entire category of "my hobby"/"Cueball getting kicked out of events" comics and that isn't any of them. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.90|172.71.158.90]] 22:29, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:I concur. It links directly to comic 514, which has nothing to do with events or getting kicked out (I can't even think what comic they meant). I took a peek at 1514 and 2514, but those don't fit, either. ??? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::Maybe [[541]] was meant? But I guess just linking to Category:Banned_from_conferences or even adding this to Category:Compromise would be better. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.166|198.41.242.166]] 14:58, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Yup, I feel sure you got it. I tried checking around 514 (going up to like 518, going down to like 510), didn't try transposing the digits. What's funny is that I often think of that specific comic 541, whenever I want a smiley face inside brackets, :) I'll update the explanation. EDIT: Ugh, someone removed it instead of fixing it. :( [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It looks very similar to [http://tom7.org/lowercase/ Comic Sands] by tom7! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.30.106|172.71.30.106]] 16:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Bumpf
:Oh incredible, I quite like the "futura work" section of that paper [[User:MrCandela|MrCandela]] ([[User talk:MrCandela|talk]]) 03:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

;A note for No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO
:''(...because you don't have a Talk page I can write to...)''
In response to recent edits from you with, for example, "(am i doing something wrong? THERE ARE TWO MANY JOKE TAGS!)" as the comment... The tag is the Incomplete (i.e. {{template|incomplete}}, and it is indeed arguable if all those marked as such are truly so (though you can bet your bottom dollar that plenty of times where the tag is removed, someone will then quite soon find something worth editing into an Explanation). But the "joke tag" is the community replacing the 'Bot-created reference to being created by A BOT with something an editor decides is funny. (They aren't always right, but someone else may impose their own humour - right or wrong - in place of the first comedian's attempt... And possibly the process repeats a few more times.)
 So, anyway, that's what the joke ''part'' of the tag is about, though the presence of the tag itself is a bit more serious. Maybe you could say that an explanation a couple of weeks old (from time of creation, at comic-publication) is only going to be 'normally and irregularly tweaked, from now on', and so would lose the Incompleteness happily enough, but some might say sooner ''or'' later than that, perhaps depending upon the comic concerned. Mega-comics in particular (e.g. interactive April Fool ones, or Time-like in scope, or those needing a "larger" version to be linked to to red properly) where genuinely there are potentially still more discoveries to be made for quite some time.
 Far more certain are the Incomplete Transcript statuses, because as soon as everything in the comic image is properly described (give or take subjective opinions), and it's in the de facto meta-notation, then removal of that status can be swift and painless (and still open to edits). Though do note that Transcripts do ''not'' currently need to contain the Title Text (it's already transcribed into the comic template header area, if done correctly), and in fact this is discouraged by the consensus view. The transcript just puts in text what is not aready in machine-readable text (for various purposes). So it's not Incomplete if every bit of Randall-drawn text is in there, every bit of drawn imagery is (sufficiently) described and - if necessary - the layout and relationships of things are also described (e.g, "There is a table which has...", rather than trying to render the table only in wikitable markup). It may not be ''correct'', but it should at least be considered complete, give or take a detail or so. ;)
 You might understand the community process best by actually going through page history for a comic's page, from the very first creation by theusafBOT (or whoever) and looking at successive diff-pages. Depends on how much time you have, though :-p [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 01:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:Who '''''are''''' you talking to? There's no comment like that or user name like that here (at least I don't see a comment when scanning through them). I was GOING to say instead of relying on a Talk page you should Reply to his comment, with a colon, like this... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::There's a [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/No_Idea_If_There%27s_A_Character_Limit_LMAO relatively new user], who has (it seems) being confused over (+ removing), Incomplete template stuff. They currently have no Talk page, so looks like the chosen approach to 'message' them was to post something in the latest Discussion spot and hope they spot it by default. May not be the ideal way, but I can imagine it maybe working?
::My POV is that Incomplete tags are supposed to help direct people to explanations needing completing, but don't really. For several reasons both technical and logistical. So their harmless fall-back as a s/A BOT/SOMETHING 'FUNNY'/ canvas is probably more a thing to be cherished. Which is not to say that they should stay that way forever, but I wouldn't persoally rush to remove them.
::(And, though it may confuse new readers, as with Citation Needed, if it gets them thinking about what they might add then it's a sneaky nudge to get fresh blood actively into the editing community. Win-win? Opinions will vary!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.134|172.70.162.134]] 12:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm gonna make the comic sans/times new roman hybrid when I can get some time. Just calling dibs! [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 07:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:yeah, this is just "comic serif". It already exists [https://twitter.com/kiersi/status/1492183706009694210 here] [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 08:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::No it's not, it SAYS "remove the serifs from Times and add them to Comic", Comic Serif has its own serifs AND is missing a Times missing serifs. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:Sorry, I already decided last night I would and I just made it before I read your dibs, guess I should have said something, :) Not going to throw out my work! :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::It's fine! I kinda abandoned it anyways and I don't think I would have done quite as good a job [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::I'd gotten as far as starting to manually tweak the tween-frames in a rather self-indulgent animated version. But your thing is as good as needs to be, and I don't have upload permissions here anyway, so it would have been too much fuss and probably just contributed to my own personal procrastination over the weekend. ;)

In case anyone wanted to know what it would look like if you moved the serifs from Times New Roman to Comic Sans, here's the before and after. :) [[File:2736MovedSerifsV2.jpg]][[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:Please also adapt the [[kerning]]! This hurts my eyes. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.166|198.41.242.166]] 11:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Randall's font isn't only serifs - there are some ball terminals in there as well.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.114|172.70.91.114]] 11:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Any guesses on what the text in the comic actually says? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.75|172.70.111.75]] 15:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:As the second comment in this talk box suggest, I think the serifs are consistent with AaBbCcDd (an easy way to showcase a typeface in a few characters). If I'm not mistaken, the transcript used to imply as much as well; does anyone know why that was removed, and can we be confident enough about the text to put that back in the transcript?
:Also, sorry about not signing above. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 19:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2736: Only Serifs

2023-02-13T19:55:16Z

Dextrous Fred: Respond to question and suggest transcript edit

Talk:2725: Sunspot Cycle

2023-01-17T05:02:10Z

Dextrous Fred: Response to comment

Holy cow, just made my first edit! It was SUPER stressful, and I didn't even know how to make a 'citation needed' thing. Hopefully it was ok, I tried to match the style of the wiki. [[User:GordonFreeman|GordonFreeman]] ([[User talk:GordonFreeman|talk]]) 03:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Is it perhaps worth mentioning that sunspots, while they're darker than the rest of the sun's surface, are not actually black. They are cooler than surrounding regions and appear dark by contrast, but they're emitting lots of IR and some visible light. A sunspots-only (ignore the oxymoron) sun would still emit light and heat, just less. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:18, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Wouldn't the cycle be 20 ("every other decade") or 22 years (11 in each half of the cycle)? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.173|162.158.166.173]] 03:51, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
The cycle of darkness of the sun would be 22 years, but the 11-year cycle referred to in the comic, and described by both diagrams within the comic, is the cycle of "number of sunspots" which peaks when the sun is half light, half dark, and decreases again as there are so many spots that they start to merge into fewer, larger spots. It cycles from very few (or zero) sunspots, when the sun is light, through many sunspots, sun is heavily light/dark spotted, and completes the cycle when the number of spots returns down to near-zero, when the sun is dark.

To what "financial crash of 2014" does this refer? I recall the housing crisis causing financial trouble, but that was around 2008. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.173|162.158.166.173]] 03:51, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone have any idea what is supposed to be on the Y axis of the bottom graph? Something that goes up when the sun is transitioning between brightnesses and is at its lowest when the sun is either fully bright or fully dark?

It's the "number of spots" (whether light or dark), since a fully bright sun has no dark spots and a fully dark sun has no "light spots"[[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2722: Etymonline

2023-01-11T16:52:34Z

Dextrous Fred: Deleting my own comment as redundant

Random fact: I recently finished reading etymonline.com from beginning to end. It taught me things about the English language that I didn't know that I didn't know. [[User:Darthpoppins|Darthpoppins]] ([[User talk:Darthpoppins|talk]]) 00:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Nice. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.235|172.71.167.235]] 04:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear whomever wrote the current explanation, please take an English composition course. It's clear you mean well, but it's really hard to read your work. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.216|172.71.158.216]] 04:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Fair enough; I'll try to clean it up [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
::Also the complainer could take use of this being a wiki and make the changes himself ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

In the comic, french word "étymologie" is incorrectly spelled "ethimologie" which is referred to as "Old French". I wonder whether that mistake was done on purpose ?
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.222|141.101.68.222]] 08:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: "Old French etimologie, ethimologie (14c., Modern French étymologie), from Latin etymologia, from Greek etymologia" from the Etymonline entry for "etymology"[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 10:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: Given that it's over 350 years from now, it really ought to say 'from Old English etymology', with what we currently call Old English now being known as Really Old English.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 09:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
::Or Ancient English. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.160|172.68.51.160]] 14:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:With the comic revelling in the degredation of contemporary knowledge as future history passes (perhaps like [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Recap/BabylonFiveS04E22TheDeconstructionOfFallingStars here, especially in 2762]), I don't think this relatively minor glitch is an error. Merely flavour. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.141|172.71.242.141]] 12:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In what is almost certainly not a coincidence, "etymology" and "blimp" are currently trending at #2 and #5, respectively, on etymoline.com as of right now (15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.236|172.70.110.236]] 15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Agree. Now Blimp is #1 and Etymology #3 as of now. Have made a screen shot with the date and ponder to insert it in the explanation under a trivia. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
::I have added the image. If someone could knows hot change the size of the image shown I would be happy. Not sure how to do that. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "folk etymonline"? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:I believe it uses "etymology" since that comment is from the perspective of some "present day" scholar, or Randall himself [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2722: Etymonline

2023-01-11T16:46:39Z

Dextrous Fred: Comment

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-11T05:41:26Z

Dextrous Fred: Cleanup and clarity

{{comic
| number = 2722
| date = January 9, 2023
| title = Etymonline
| image = etymonline_2x.png
| imagesize = 458x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = NOTE TO FUTURE ETYMONLINGUISTS: Our best guess is that 'blimp' is onomatopoeia. The 'B-Limp' thing is a folk etymology.
}}

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

This comic depicts an entry from a dictionary written in the far future (at least the year 2384 based on the textual reference). The definition of "etymonline" makes it clear that it has simply supplanted the word "etymology" in the intervening centuries. This is a reference to the internet service known as [https://www.etymonline.com/ Etymonline] or the Online Etymology Dictionary, and implies that Etymonline as a source became synonymous with the concept of etymology. Perhaps Etymonline grew into such a comprehensive and reputable source that it deserved the all-encompassing identification with the concept of etymology; alternatively, popular usage removed the original term in favor of the name for the tool associated with learning a word's origin. All we know is that the brief etymology given in the entry cites "modification" of a more archaic English form (the one we are familiar with), without any mention of the digital resource. This is a mild failure on the part of the dictionary entry, since the suffix "online" should at least have been noted as the modifier resulting in the current form. Perhaps a discussion of the specific internet service was not relevant in the entry, or the very concept of "online" has been so superseded by whatever its successors or usurpers might have become that it was lost to common, or indeed academic, knowledge.

The title text plays with this (replacing "etymologist" with the derived term "etymonlinguist"). It is a comment from some present-day scholar directed to the author of the futuristic entry by clarifying what they know about the etymology of the word "blimp". The comment references two theories of the etymology (that it is simply onomatopoeia or that it was constructed from the phrase "Type B - Limp") and rejects the latter as a folk etymology (consistent with {{wiktionary|blimp|the explanation}} on Wiktionary). It is interesting to note that the current [https://www.etymonline.com/word/blimp Etymonline entry] only lists the B-Limp origin and does not mention onomatopoeia, though it does at least acknowledge that the origin is "obscure".

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

:[A picture of a dictionary definition that is askew in the frame to imply that it is printed or written on physical paper rather than a digital resource.]

:'''etymonline''' (n) et・y・mon・line /,ɛt.əmɒn'lain/ The history and derivation of a word. Altered form of English ''etymology'', from Old French ''ethimologie'', from Latin ''etymologia''. Quotation: "Before it came to refer to Jupiter's sky-cities, the term 'blimp' was used for 20th century Earth airships, but its etymonline before that is unknown." –''Jovian Blimps: A History'' (2384)

:[Caption below comic:]
:Ironically, the popularity of Etymonline eventually caused the loss of the word "etymology" from English.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Comics with lowercase text]]

Talk:2722: Etymonline

2023-01-11T05:33:19Z

Dextrous Fred: Response to comment

Random fact: I recently finished reading etymonline.com from beginning to end. It taught me things about the English language that I didn't know that I didn't know. [[User:Darthpoppins|Darthpoppins]] ([[User talk:Darthpoppins|talk]]) 00:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Nice. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.235|172.71.167.235]] 04:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear whomever wrote the current explanation, please take an English composition course. It's clear you mean well, but it's really hard to read your work. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.216|172.71.158.216]] 04:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

: Fair enough; I'll try to clean it up [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

In the comic, french word "étymologie" is incorrectly spelled "ethimologie" which is referred to as "Old French". I wonder whether that mistake was done on purpose ?
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.222|141.101.68.222]] 08:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: "Old French etimologie, ethimologie (14c., Modern French étymologie), from Latin etymologia, from Greek etymologia" from the Etymonline entry for "etymology"[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 10:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: Given that it's over 350 years from now, it really ought to say 'from Old English etymology', with what we currently call Old English now being known as Really Old English.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 09:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:With the comic revelling in the degredation of contemporary knowledge as future history passes (perhaps like [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Recap/BabylonFiveS04E22TheDeconstructionOfFallingStars here, especially in 2762]), I don't think this relatively minor glitch is an error. Merely flavour. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.141|172.71.242.141]] 12:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In what is almost certainly not a coincidence, "etymology" and "blimp" are currently trending at #2 and #5, respectively, on etymoline.com as of right now (15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.236|172.70.110.236]] 15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "folk etymonline"? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

: I believe it uses "etymology" since that comment is from the perspective of some "present day" scholar, or Randall himself [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2722: Etymonline

2023-01-11T05:32:12Z

Dextrous Fred: Response

Random fact: I recently finished reading etymonline.com from beginning to end. It taught me things about the English language that I didn't know that I didn't know. [[User:Darthpoppins|Darthpoppins]] ([[User talk:Darthpoppins|talk]]) 00:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Nice. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.235|172.71.167.235]] 04:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear whomever wrote the current explanation, please take an English composition course. It's clear you mean well, but it's really hard to read your work. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.216|172.71.158.216]] 04:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In the comic, french word "étymologie" is incorrectly spelled "ethimologie" which is referred to as "Old French". I wonder whether that mistake was done on purpose ?
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.222|141.101.68.222]] 08:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: "Old French etimologie, ethimologie (14c., Modern French étymologie), from Latin etymologia, from Greek etymologia" from the Etymonline entry for "etymology"[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 10:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: Given that it's over 350 years from now, it really ought to say 'from Old English etymology', with what we currently call Old English now being known as Really Old English.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 09:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:With the comic revelling in the degredation of contemporary knowledge as future history passes (perhaps like [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Recap/BabylonFiveS04E22TheDeconstructionOfFallingStars here, especially in 2762]), I don't think this relatively minor glitch is an error. Merely flavour. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.141|172.71.242.141]] 12:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In what is almost certainly not a coincidence, "etymology" and "blimp" are currently trending at #2 and #5, respectively, on etymoline.com as of right now (15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.236|172.70.110.236]] 15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "folk etymonline"? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

: I believe it uses "etymology" since that comment is from the perspective of some "present day" scholar, or Randall himself [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-10T00:01:16Z

Dextrous Fred: Cleanup

{{comic
| number = 2722
| date = January 9, 2023
| title = Etymonline
| image = etymonline_2x.png
| imagesize = 458x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = NOTE TO FUTURE ETYMONLINGUISTS: Our best guess is that 'blimp' is onomatopoeia. The 'B-Limp' thing is a folk etymology.
}}

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

This comic appears to be an entry from a dictionary posted in the far future (at least the year 2384 based on the textual reference). The entry defines the term "etymonline" in a way that makes it clear that it has simply supplanted the word "etymology" in the intervening centuries. This is a reference to the internet service known as [https://www.etymonline.com/ Etymonline] or the Online Etymology Dictionary, and implies that Etymonline as a source became synonymous with the concept of etymology. This may have been because Etymonline grew into such a comprehensive and reputable source that it truly deserved the all-encompassing identification with the concept of etymology; alternatively, humans' efficiency of language removed the original term in favor of the name for the tool they used when they needed to learn a word's origin. All we know is that the origin of the "modern" term is simply cited as a modification of a more archaic English form, without any mention of the digital resource. This is a mild failure on the part of the dictionary entry, since the suffix "online" should at least have been noted as the modifier resulting in the current form, even if a discussion of the specific internet service was not relevant in the entry.

The title text plays with this (replacing "etymologist" with the derived term "etymonlinguist"). It is a comment from some present-day scholar attempting to communicate with the author of the futuristic entry by clarifying what they know about the etymology of the word "blimp". The comment references two theories of the etymology (that it is simply onomatopoeia or that it was constructed from the phrase B-Limp) and rejects the latter as a folk etymology (consistent with the explanation on [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/blimp wiktionary]). It is interesting to note that the current [https://www.etymonline.com/word/blimp Etymonline entry] only lists the B-Limp origin and does not mention onomatopoeia, though it does at least acknowledge that the origin is "obscure".

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

[picture of what appears to be a dictionary definition, askew in the frame to imply that it is printed on physical paper rather than a digital resource. The text reads as follows]

'''etymonline''' [pronunciation guide]
The history and derivation of a word. Altered form of English ''etymology'', from Old French ''ethimologie'', from Latin ''etymologia''. Quotation: "Before it came to refer to Jupiter's sky-cities, the term 'blimp' was used for 20th century Earth airships, but its etymonline before that is unknown." –''Jovian Blimps: A History'' (2384)

[Caption below comic]
Ironically, the popularity of Etymonline eventually caused the loss of the word "etymology" from English

{{comic discussion}}

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-10T00:00:53Z

Dextrous Fred: Punctuation

{{comic
| number = 2722
| date = January 9, 2023
| title = Etymonline
| image = etymonline_2x.png
| imagesize = 458x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = NOTE TO FUTURE ETYMONLINGUISTS: Our best guess is that 'blimp' is onomatopoeia. The 'B-Limp' thing is a folk etymology.
}}

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

This comic appears to be an entry from a dictionary posted in the far future (at least the year 2384 based on the textual reference). The entry defines the term "etymonline" in a way that makes it clear that it has simply supplanted the word "etymology" in the intervening centuries. This is a clear reference to the internet service known as [https://www.etymonline.com/ Etymonline] or the Online Etymology Dictionary, and implies that Etymonline as a source became synonymous with the concept of etymology. This may have been because Etymonline grew into such a comprehensive and reputable source that it truly deserved the all-encompassing identification with the concept of etymology; alternatively, humans' efficiency of language removed the original term in favor of the name for the tool they used when they needed to learn a word's origin. All we know is that the origin of the "modern" term is simply cited as a modification of a more archaic English form, without any mention of the digital resource. This is a mild failure on the part of the dictionary entry, since the suffix "online" should at least have been noted as the modifier resulting in the current form, even if a discussion of the specific internet service was not relevant in the entry.

The title text plays with this (replacing "etymologist" with the derived term "etymonlinguist"). It is a comment from some present-day scholar attempting to communicate with the author of the futuristic entry by clarifying what they know about the etymology of the word "blimp". The comment references two theories of the etymology (that it is simply onomatopoeia or that it was constructed from the phrase B-Limp) and rejects the latter as a folk etymology (consistent with the explanation on [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/blimp wiktionary]). It is interesting to note that the current [https://www.etymonline.com/word/blimp Etymonline entry] only lists the B-Limp origin and does not mention onomatopoeia, though it does at least acknowledge that the origin is "obscure".

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

[picture of what appears to be a dictionary definition, askew in the frame to imply that it is printed on physical paper rather than a digital resource. The text reads as follows]

'''etymonline''' [pronunciation guide]
The history and derivation of a word. Altered form of English ''etymology'', from Old French ''ethimologie'', from Latin ''etymologia''. Quotation: "Before it came to refer to Jupiter's sky-cities, the term 'blimp' was used for 20th century Earth airships, but its etymonline before that is unknown." –''Jovian Blimps: A History'' (2384)

[Caption below comic]
Ironically, the popularity of Etymonline eventually caused the loss of the word "etymology" from English

{{comic discussion}}

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-10T00:00:27Z

Dextrous Fred: Added link to wiktionary

{{comic
| number = 2722
| date = January 9, 2023
| title = Etymonline
| image = etymonline_2x.png
| imagesize = 458x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = NOTE TO FUTURE ETYMONLINGUISTS: Our best guess is that 'blimp' is onomatopoeia. The 'B-Limp' thing is a folk etymology.
}}

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

This comic appears to be an entry from a dictionary posted in the far future (at least the year 2384 based on the textual reference). The entry defines the term "etymonline" in a way that makes it clear that it has simply supplanted the word "etymology" in the intervening centuries. This is a clear reference to the internet service known as [https://www.etymonline.com/ Etymonline] or the Online Etymology Dictionary, and implies that Etymonline as a source became synonymous with the concept of etymology. This may have been because Etymonline grew into such a comprehensive and reputable source that it truly deserved the all-encompassing identification with the concept of etymology; alternatively, humans' efficiency of language removed the original term in favor of the name for the tool they used when they needed to learn a word's origin. All we know is that the origin of the "modern" term is simply cited as a modification of a more archaic English form, without any mention of the digital resource. This is a mild failure on the part of the dictionary entry, since the suffix "online" should at least have been noted as the modifier resulting in the current form, even if a discussion of the specific internet service was not relevant in the entry.

The title text plays with this (replacing "etymologist" with the derived term "etymonlinguist"). It is a comment from some present-day scholar attempting to communicate with the author of the futuristic entry by clarifying what they know about the etymology of the word "blimp". The comment references two theories of the etymology (that it is simply onomatopoeia or that it was constructed from the phrase B-Limp) and rejects the latter as a folk etymology (consistent with the explanation on [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/blimp wiktionary]. It is interesting to note that the current [https://www.etymonline.com/word/blimp Etymonline entry] only lists the B-Limp origin and does not mention onomatopoeia, though it does at least acknowledge that the origin is "obscure".

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

[picture of what appears to be a dictionary definition, askew in the frame to imply that it is printed on physical paper rather than a digital resource. The text reads as follows]

'''etymonline''' [pronunciation guide]
The history and derivation of a word. Altered form of English ''etymology'', from Old French ''ethimologie'', from Latin ''etymologia''. Quotation: "Before it came to refer to Jupiter's sky-cities, the term 'blimp' was used for 20th century Earth airships, but its etymonline before that is unknown." –''Jovian Blimps: A History'' (2384)

[Caption below comic]
Ironically, the popularity of Etymonline eventually caused the loss of the word "etymology" from English

{{comic discussion}}

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-09T23:59:16Z

Dextrous Fred: Added some links, gave comment on the etymology of etymonline

{{comic
| number = 2722
| date = January 9, 2023
| title = Etymonline
| image = etymonline_2x.png
| imagesize = 458x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = NOTE TO FUTURE ETYMONLINGUISTS: Our best guess is that 'blimp' is onomatopoeia. The 'B-Limp' thing is a folk etymology.
}}

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

This comic appears to be an entry from a dictionary posted in the far future (at least the year 2384 based on the textual reference). The entry defines the term "etymonline" in a way that makes it clear that it has simply supplanted the word "etymology" in the intervening centuries. This is a clear reference to the internet service known as [https://www.etymonline.com/ Etymonline] or the Online Etymology Dictionary, and implies that Etymonline as a source became synonymous with the concept of etymology. This may have been because Etymonline grew into such a comprehensive and reputable source that it truly deserved the all-encompassing identification with the concept of etymology; alternatively, humans' efficiency of language removed the original term in favor of the name for the tool they used when they needed to learn a word's origin. All we know is that the origin of the "modern" term is simply cited as a modification of a more archaic English form, without any mention of the digital resource. This is a mild failure on the part of the dictionary entry, since the suffix "online" should at least have been noted as the modifier resulting in the current form, even if a discussion of the specific internet service was not relevant in the entry.

The title text plays with this (replacing "etymologist" with the derived term "etymonlinguist"). It is a comment from some present-day scholar attempting to communicate with the author of the futuristic entry by clarifying what they know about the etymology of the word "blimp". The comment references two theories of the etymology (that it is simply onomatopoeia or that it was constructed from the phrase B-Limp) and rejects the latter as a folk etymology. It is interesting to note that the current [https://www.etymonline.com/word/blimp Etymonline entry] only lists the B-Limp origin and does not mention onomatopoeia, though it does at least acknowledge that the origin is "obscure".

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

[picture of what appears to be a dictionary definition, askew in the frame to imply that it is printed on physical paper rather than a digital resource. The text reads as follows]

'''etymonline''' [pronunciation guide]
The history and derivation of a word. Altered form of English ''etymology'', from Old French ''ethimologie'', from Latin ''etymologia''. Quotation: "Before it came to refer to Jupiter's sky-cities, the term 'blimp' was used for 20th century Earth airships, but its etymonline before that is unknown." –''Jovian Blimps: A History'' (2384)

[Caption below comic]
Ironically, the popularity of Etymonline eventually caused the loss of the word "etymology" from English

{{comic discussion}}

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-09T23:52:09Z

Dextrous Fred: Summary of title text

{{comic
| number = 2722
| date = January 9, 2023
| title = Etymonline
| image = etymonline_2x.png
| imagesize = 458x280px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = NOTE TO FUTURE ETYMONLINGUISTS: Our best guess is that 'blimp' is onomatopoeia. The 'B-Limp' thing is a folk etymology.
}}

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

This comic appears to be an entry from a dictionary posted in the far future (at least the year 2384 based on the textual reference). The entry defines the term "etymonline" in a way that makes it clear that it has simply supplanted the word "etymology" in the intervening centuries. This is a clear reference to the internet service "etymonline", an online etymology dictionary, and implies that Etymonline as a source became synonymous with the concept of etymology. Whether this is because Etymonline grew into such a comprehensive and reputable source that it truly deserved the all-encompassing identification with the concept of etymology or simply because humans' efficiency of language removed the original term in favor of the name for the tool they used when they needed to learn a word's origin is irrelevant.

The title text plays with this (replacing "etymologist" with the derived term "etymonlinguist"). It is a comment from some present-day scholar attempting to communicate with the author of the futuristic entry by clarifying what they know about the etymology of the word "blimp". The comment references two theories of the etymology (that it is simply onomatopoeia or that it was constructed from the phrase B-Limp) and rejects the latter as a folk etymology. It is interesting to note that the current Etymonline article only lists the B-Limp origin and does not mention onomatopoeia, though it does at least acknowledge that the origin is "obscure".

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

[picture of what appears to be a dictionary definition, askew in the frame to imply that it is printed on physical paper rather than a digital resource. The text reads as follows]

'''etymonline''' [pronunciation guide]
The history and derivation of a word. Altered form of English ''etymology'', from Old French ''ethimologie'', from Latin ''etymologia''. Quotation: "Before it came to refer to Jupiter's sky-cities, the term 'blimp' was used for 20th century Earth airships, but its etymonline before that is unknown." –''Jovian Blimps: A History'' (2384)

[Caption below comic]
Ironically, the popularity of Etymonline eventually caused the loss of the word "etymology" from English

{{comic discussion}}

2722: Etymonline

2023-01-09T23:42:09Z

Dextrous Fred: Transcript and first part of explanation

2704: Faucet

2022-11-29T03:48:22Z

Dextrous Fred: Title text explanation (not sure if the ent reference is necessary but I thought it was fun)

{{comic
| number = 2704
| date = November 28, 2022
| title = Faucet
| image = faucet_2x.png
| imagesize = 315x414px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It's okay, they can figure out which control positions produce scalding water via a trial-and-error feedback loop with a barely-perceptible 10-second lag.
}}

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

A variety of faucet controls have been designed for the control of a shower or sink's output; however, Randall seems to find all the existing options to be inadequate in some way and posits in this comic that engineers share a desire to create a more ideal design.

In general, a faucet's output has two independent parameters: flow velocity and temperature; some particularly frustrating faucet controls only offer one degree of freedom which simultaneously turns up the flow rate and the temperature, and thus cannot fully explore the shower-space (making it sometimes difficult to find a comfortable setting). Some faucets can adjust both parameters but only have a single lever which must be angled along degrees of freedom which are not always labeled clearly, and this may also irk Randall. However, other faucets have two independent controls for the flow of cold water and hot water, and it is less obvious why these are not sufficiently advanced to satisfy Randall (and his generic engineer).

While two-handle faucets may seem simple in the abstract, they are imperfect in practice. In older houses or those with hot water systems based on tankless or instanthot water heaters, the hot water pressure is rarely the same as the cold water pressure. This can cause problems with cold water flowing back into the hot line, creating temperature drifts, unexpected changes in temperature based on slight input changes, and non-reproducibility in shower settings. In addition, it is not obvious how to change the flow rate without changing the temperature in these systems.

Newer systems include "Thermostatic Valves" which are designed to alleviate these problems; ideally, they contain one control for temperature and one for flow, which would seem to fit the "non-confusing" brief and solve Randall's problems. However, designing a system technically functional and making it intuitive (and making it work in practice for all water supply systems) is non-trivial, so Randall may have had trouble with even these faucets in the past.

The title text is a hyperbolic and slightly sarcastic explanation of the merits of a faucet system (presumably from the engineer who designed it): it describes that the user can achieve an undesirable result (scalding water) through a lot of effort (a trial-and-error feedback loop) with a decidedly long delay in response time (10 seconds is only barely perceptible if you happen to be an ent).

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

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2704: Faucet

2022-11-29T03:44:54Z

Dextrous Fred: Offering my personal opinion

Are faucet designs considered to be confusing? I'm never confused by normal ones like [https://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/sundsvik-kitchen-faucet-chrome-plated__0756711_pe749051_s5.jpg?f=s these]

Yeah I came here wondering the same thing. Is the joke perhaps not so much that the controls are confusing in terms of intent, but just in terms of determining the bounds? Eg, with two identical faucet controls and identical water pressures, "full blast hot" still translates to something radically different, if one building has a water heater set to 120F and the other building has a water heater set to 160F.{{unsigned ip|172.69.170.189|02:46, 29 November 2022}}
:(I find °F confusing, personally, but...) ...the easiest thing is to have two taps, one hot and one cold. Yes, they can combine into a single spout, but there are various conflicting plusses and minuses of that over having the two independent ones per outlet. Speaking (as I'm sure mixer-tap afficionados worldwide will appreciate) as a Brit. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.24|172.70.85.24]] 03:03, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
::Relevant Tom Scott video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfHgUu_8KgA Why Britain Uses Separate Hot and Cold Taps]. TL;DR: British houses used to get their hot water from rat-filled cisterns so they wanted to keep the hot water separate from the cold water, and old habits die hard. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.152|162.158.63.152]] 03:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:::Silliness of dual-taps aside, that doesn't solve the issue of identical tap hardware yielding radically different results depending on what the hot water thermostat is set to. Maybe that's not the original joke (I'm still not sure what it was) but it's worth mentioning at least. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.170.146|172.69.170.146]] 03:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I sympathize with Randall here; even controls designed to independently control temperature and flow rarely meet both the "intuitive to use at a glance" and "function as described" requirements to make them non-confusing. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 03:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

2704: Faucet

2022-11-29T03:42:49Z

Dextrous Fred: Continuing explanation

{{comic
| number = 2704
| date = November 28, 2022
| title = Faucet
| image = faucet_2x.png
| imagesize = 315x414px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It's okay, they can figure out which control positions produce scalding water via a trial-and-error feedback loop with a barely-perceptible 10-second lag.
}}

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

A variety of faucet controls have been designed for the control of a shower or sink's output; however, Randall seems to find all the existing options to be inadequate in some way and posits in this comic that engineers share a desire to create a more ideal design.

In general, a faucet's output has two independent parameters: flow velocity and temperature; some particularly frustrating faucet controls only offer one degree of freedom which simultaneously turns up the flow rate and the temperature, and thus cannot fully explore the shower-space (making it sometimes difficult to find a comfortable setting). Some faucets can adjust both parameters but only have a single lever which must be angled along degrees of freedom which are not always labeled clearly, and this may also irk Randall. However, other faucets have two independent controls for the flow of cold water and hot water, and it is less obvious why these are not sufficiently advanced to satisfy Randall (and his generic engineer).

While two-handle faucets may seem simple in the abstract, they are imperfect in practice. In older houses or those with hot water systems based on tankless or instanthot water heaters, the hot water pressure is rarely the same as the cold water pressure. This can cause problems with cold water flowing back into the hot line, creating temperature drifts, unexpected changes in temperature based on slight input changes, and non-reproducibility in shower settings. In addition, it is not obvious how to change the flow rate without changing the temperature in these systems.

Newer systems include "Thermostatic Valves" which are designed to alleviate these problems; ideally, they contain one control for temperature and one for flow, which would seem to fit the "non-confusing" brief and solve Randall's problems. However, designing a system technically functional and making it intuitive (and making it work in practice for all water supply systems) is non-trivial, so Randall may have had trouble with even these faucets in the past.

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

{{comic discussion}}

2704: Faucet

2022-11-29T03:32:00Z

Dextrous Fred: Initial explanation (will add more)

Talk:1836: Okeanos

2022-09-26T22:30:43Z

Dextrous Fred: Real-life example

Take it from here guys. Also, glad the website is back online! [[User:Nialpxe|Nialpxe]] ([[User talk:Nialpxe|talk]]) 06:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

"Who else is watching..." is used as some form of community bonding on Youtube to connect with other people re-watching (or watching for the first time) (much) older videos at a later date. COmpare with "Who else got here from XKCD [or similar]" if the video was linked from a particular site and it's users are trying to recognize each other. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.76|162.158.222.76]] 07:03, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Yay! The website's finally back online! --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD''' ]][[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]] 11:35, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Isn't often Randall does color. Hmmm, must be Fake. :) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.11|108.162.238.11]] 11:37, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:Guess it is supposed to be funny, but just for the sake of it... Randall has done [[:Category:Comics with color|383 comics with color]], including this one, making it more than one in five (20.9%) that use color! ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

"When I went on a boat I dropped my phone can you look for it" I wonder if this is supposed to mean that the phone [insert name here] dropped is the one live-streaming or if [insert name here] is asking the people on the live-stream to look for his phone. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD''' ]][[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]] 11:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Crafting might not be a Minecraft reference, as lots of games have crafting. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.206.52|172.68.206.52]] 12:54, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:Fixed it. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|'''JayRules''XKCD''' ]][[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|what's up?]] 13:30, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:First time I read that, I was thinking along the lines of a Let's Play with a MMO. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.78.70|172.68.78.70]] 13:08, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
:: Me too. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 09:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

"[T]he ocean... is not a small place[citation needed]" is flat out hilarious. I just want to show my appreciation for whoever put 'citation needed' in there. I'm going to spend the next several days just thinking about how funny that is. [[User:IonFreeman|IonFreeman]] ([[User talk:IonFreeman|talk]]) 13:38, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:Honestly, I feel that joke is ''way'' too overused on this wiki [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.197|172.68.142.197]] 16:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
::{{Citation needed}} [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.10|108.162.219.10]] 17:46, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
::I only can remember it being used twice, and this was one of those two. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 16:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:::Yes it is used too much. I have rephrased the title text explanation anyway, and deleted it. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Did anyone notice the subtle style changes to xkcd? The buttons at the top have their glow going beyond the black line now, and (less noticable) your mouse needs to be one pixel farther into the comic to see the mouseover text. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.82|172.68.34.82]] 18:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
:No, but thanks for mentioning. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Why is the title text capitalized?
:Whoever added that to the chat has capslock on, I assume--[[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.220|172.68.141.220]] 11:47, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

It says that this comic needs more explanation of the comments. However, there is a quite detailed table beneath it that described the comments. Does this still need the incomplete tag? [[User:Dretler|Dretler]] ([[User talk:Dretler|talk]]) 18:35, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I thought that this comic was being a little unfair to the average person watching a scientific livestream. I am watching the live NASA feed of the impact of DART into Didymos, and of the 120,000 people currently watching, it does seem that the most vocal people are exhibiting this level, or more, of trolling and scientifically dubious comments. Randall, I should not have doubted you. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 22:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2022-09-19T03:10:58Z

Dextrous Fred: Adding one more comment

Came here for insight, only to discover this is tomorrow's comic, I'm viewing Friday's comic on Thursday after midnight. D'oh! Damn, seeing a comic early and I can't provide or contribute to the explanation, LOL! I realize the bracket and "Sweet 16" are sports things, I think football and/or basketball, and I spotted the famous name Roe vs. Wade, so seems like court cases, but that's it. Looking forward to people explaining the smaller jokes (I spotted "Loving" and "Virginia", and I feel like I recall their license plates say "Virginia Is For Lovers" I think, I expect something there). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:Protip: Thursday after midnight is Friday! Nonetheless this comic was released at 0:00 EDT meaning it was still Thursday at time zones westwards. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 07:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
::Protip: While technically true that after midnight is the next day, you'll find that anybody who stays awake past midnight, especially people who habitually do so, don't consider the day to have changed until they've gone to sleep and woken up. :) Since the majority of the time, the new XKCD is posted several hours later - I suspect 8am in Randall's / my time zone (I don't know, I've never been awake for it) - I find this is actually a valid point. It was available when night owls like me and Randall were still awake for Thursday, and when it even technically WAS still Thursday for the rest of the continent. Also, pointing this out is what most people call nitpicking, making the effort to make a pointless point, to declare something everybody knows already. It's a bad thing. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 12:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
:I got here at like 9:10 Pacific time and the comic was already up; normally I have to wait until like 1 AM before Randall posts it/you guys auto-mirror it.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.235|172.68.189.235]] 08:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
::The pages here are created automatically less than two minutes after the original was published on xkcd. Today, like some others in the recent past, this happened at 4:01 UTC (or GMT - the server time) which corresponds to 0:01 EDT (Randall time) and 21:01 PDT (the day before at your time.) The weekday is defined by Randall's time zone - US citizens should know about the shift from east to west. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Errm. You can go back to the previous comic if you hit the [<Prev] button just above the current one. {{unsigned ip|141.101.107.36}}
:Do you have a point? Who are you talking to? I suspect it's me, in which case you seemed to have missed something somewhere. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 12:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree that this is a sports reference, but can someone also include some sort of note about the title? I think that the "Supreme COURT" is referring to a basketball COURT, connected to how brackets like this are used in basketball like with March Madness. [[User:B. A. Beder|B. A. Beder]] ([[User talk:B. A. Beder|talk]]) 05:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:No, I'm pretty sure it's titled Supreme Court Bracket because the bracket consists of cases in which the Supreme Court of the United States made the rulings. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.6|162.158.90.6]] 10:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
::Why not both? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.82|108.162.219.82]] 18:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:::There is an actual basketball court in the Supreme Court building: https://www.si.com/nba/2018/07/25/supreme-court-building-basketball-court [[User:Tplaza64|Tplaza64]] ([[User talk:Tplaza64|talk]]) 00:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
:::This is clearly both, combining "Basketball Court" with "Supreme Court". This crossover is the very basis of this comic's joke. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 12:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Well, how would the tournament turn out? We know who won the cases, so who's the king of the US legal system? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.66|162.158.90.66]] 06:41, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
: Many participants fail to reappear for the round 2, so not much progress yet. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.86|141.101.77.86]] 13:24, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:: I think it would be interesting if someone who knows a little more about the US legal system could write some short fanfic pieces about each of the cases later in the bracket. Maybe write each participant as if they were actually individuals, and try to come up with a reason for each case that's kind of consistent with their previously shown personalities. In cases like NLRB v Brown (mentioned below), you could just link to the case or give a short dramatised summary. For cases that haven't happened in reality, post a short piece describing the case presented, and let people vote on the outcome (as I believe was previously done for another comic about brackets, on Twitter or something I think?). I'd love to see how it went. -- [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 15:38, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Moral of the story: If you are the respondent in a landmark case, you might as well give up. --[[User:Troy0|Troy0]] ([[User talk:Troy0|talk]]) 07:53, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:I noticed that as well. Do most "landmark" cases go to the plaintiff or is this just an outlier sample?[[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.235|172.68.189.235]] 08:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
: But Marbury actually won the case, the court was unable to deliver the ruling [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.104|162.158.155.104]] 09:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
::"Marbury won"? Not according to the unanimous 4-0 ruling AGAINST Marbury.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.140|172.69.22.140]] 20:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
: As I see it (IANAL), the plaintiff goal in the Supreme Court usually is to change something (overrule a previous court decision, repeal a law), while the respondent typically fights to keep things the same. If the plaintiff loses, no changes are made. If nobody sees any changes in the country, why the case would be a landmark? Only when both outcomes change things for many people, like in the Dred Scott case, the respondent win makes a landmark. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.86|141.101.77.86]] 13:24, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
I think this comic is unique because the comic references real life events without throwing in any fake events for comic effect. Usually the comic would have some imaginary events included. I guess just the idea that winners of Supreme Court cases are going to come back to the court and compete against each other is comical enough. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 15:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

;Adding an image
I created an image showing the winners superimposed on the original comic so you can see who is due to "play" each other next. Is there any way to upload the file? the image is this: http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:UploadStash/thumb/15zj3hymeul4.6wctza.13964.png/600px-15zj3hymeul4.6wctza.13964.png [[User:Mrdownes|Mrdownes]] ([[User talk:Mrdownes|talk]]) 11:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:In general we don't need such an image because it doesn't explain much and the winners are already highlighted at the explanation. This Wiki isn't a picture book. Nevertheless check the menu and you will find the entry "Upload file". --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:09, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
:: I found it helpful in order to see who would play who in the next round. I couldn't upload the image because it said I didn't have permission to create a page. {{unsigned|Mrdownes}}
:::Sorry, I didn't want to offend you. Even I get a stupid error message when clicking your link above. Nevertheless you only have to do a few edits or comments here until you automatically granted the rights for uploading files. So you are welcome to participate, if it is helpful or not will be decided by the community not only me or other admins. I've stated my opinion but that's only me. There is no censorship here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
::On the contrary, I must strongly disagree. Such an image would be so helpful and informative that it should actually be considered a mandatory addition, that this article is incomplete without such an image (or some other representation of this). As it stands, anyone wanting to know about Round 2 would have to go back and forth between the comic and the explanation multiple times, to see which cases are matched together and to see who won those cases. And this wouldn't work for the entire round, as there's a limit to how many cases someone can do this for only in our minds, we'd have to write it down. Might as well have it written down once and include it for everybody.[[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 12:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
:I think that updated bracket image would be fun to see regardless. Please do post it. [[User:Wisnij|Wisnij]] ([[User talk:Wisnij|talk]]) 19:08, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The Brown won the NLRB v Brown match in round 2. (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/278/) -[[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.244|172.69.69.244]] 15:19, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
: Are there any other possible matchups that were actual cases in the same way? Someone already mentioned ''Massachusetts v Connecticut''. How would you fill in the bracket to get the maximum number of real cases? -- [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 15:38, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Just wanted to thank all you folks for the explanation! I couldn't make head or tail of this comic… (Comes of being a non-USian, I guess. Even after reading this page, I only recognised two of those cases. xkcd is usually pretty universal — within the geek world, anyway — and US-specific ones like this are pretty puzzling to the rest of us.) Cheers! — [[User:Gidds|Gidds]] ([[User talk:Gidds|talk]]) 23:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The joke here is simply that, while court cases are competitions, the winner of a case does not challenge the winner of another case (unlike sports tournaments). It's a juxtaposition joke, made funnier by the fact that "court" is used in sports as well. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.189.163|172.68.189.163]] 00:09, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

I just realized that the part of the explanation about the title text is not entirely correct. It mentions that a bracket is busted when a matchup does not have the predicted result, but I think it needs to point out the fact that it's related to any matchup that includes the team you picked to win the bracket instead of just any matchup in the bracket. In summary, if the team you picked to make it past the bracket loses a matchup, you then have no chance of a correct pick for any team from that bracket in later matchups - hence that bracket is busted. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 04:04, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Just as tables cause readability issues, semantic use of italics can cause issues. Specifically, it is not safe to assume that screen reading software will distinguish italicized content such that a blind person will be aware which side won the case in the comic description. It is safe only to explicity indicate the winner through text. [[User:Thisisnotatest|Thisisnotatest]] ([[User talk:Thisisnotatest|talk]]) 07:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
:The headers were no headers but just links with the winner in bold. I changed it to headers (which are already bold) and the link in the text below. No links in headers is a common wiki style. And because the header is bold I switched to italics. And as now together with the word winner in parentheses it looks fine, doesn't it? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Random human:Did you know there's a basketball court above the supreme court? The highest court in the land... Is this a basketball match ending with finalists playing in that basketball court? {{unsigned ip|162.158.63.238}}
:Was already mentioned above. While the Supreme Court is the highest court in the US, the basketball court in the same building is one floor above the actual courtroom. Thus it may be literally "the highest court in the land..." (Washington DC). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:27, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I think there's more to this than the current description suggests. These cases are precedents which all currently exist alongside each other but which could, theoretically (but in the light of recent appointments, very possibly) be used to overrule each other in some way. If, as is widely feared, Roe v. Wade were to be overturned it would not be overturned in a vacuum but by a judgement based on another legal precedent. The point being made therefore is not that the claimants themselves are in competition (as the description notes, many are dead) but that the cases themselves are as precedents, none of which has any greater legal authority than any other. My knowledge of the minutiae of the cases themselves is not up to analysing whether there's particular reasoning behind the choices of which cases are in which brackets, but I'm sure there is insight and irony hidden here for someone with a better background in the law to uncover - lawyers needed![[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.21|162.158.158.21]] 17:57, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
:I'm not a lawyer but simple logic tells me that you are over-interpreting the comic. When reading the still not complete explanation you can see the cases are ordered chronological. This means the cases at the nearby brackets are only connected within a small time frame. As one example look at the bracket ''Bush v. Gore'' (2000 Presidential election) and ''Lawrence v. Texas'' (sodomy laws, same-sex sexual activity); I can't see any further meanings at that bracket. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I've added in the last explanations for the court cases; the description in the "incomplete" template would seem to suggest that said template should be removed. Do y'all concur? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.66|162.158.106.66]] 05:03, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks for your work. I've removed the incomplete tag. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning that Row v Wade is not the binding precedent on abortion laws anymore (and hasn't been since Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1992)? To the best of my knowledge, its the only case in the bracket that is no longer precedent.14:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
:It's 2022 and Roe v Wade is not the binding precedent for a wholly different reason (not sure if the explanation needs an update but it's certainly a development that was unforeseen when the comic was made...)

2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-14T16:37:26Z

Dextrous Fred: Removed reference that I added because someone has added a better reference

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

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

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

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

===Table of things you should not do===
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Number !! Entry !! Explanation
|-
! colspan="3" | From existing list
|-
|156,812
|Eat Tide Pods
|{{w|Consumption of Tide Pods|Tide Pod}}s are a brand of laundry detergent sold in small packets ("pods") of water-soluble gel. Many children have tried to eat them, thinking them to be candy, and have had to go to the hospital to treat poisoning. In 2017 and 2018, a satirical "challenge" originated around eating Tide Pods.
|-
|156,813
|Walk on stilts in a thunderstorm
|Taller objects are more likely to be struck by lightning, so walking on stilts outdoors would increase the risk of death by electrocution. It would also presumably risk falling and injuring oneself that way, since the ground becomes wet in a rainstorm.
|-
|156,814
|Set off fireworks at a gas station
|This has the risk of potentially causing an explosion in the gas station, from the sparks of the fireworks.
|-
|156,815
|Feed your cat treats that are the exact shape and texture of a human hand
|This probably runs the risk of the cat attempting to eat your hand, instead of a cat treat.
|-
! colspan="3" | New!
|-
|156,816
|Lean over a geyser vent and try to look down into it
|Geysers shoot steam and hot water upward. If a person were to lean over the geyser and look down during an eruption, they would be struck in the face by this hot liquid and gas mixture and severely injured or killed. This is a reference to a question from ''What-If? 2'' (called, appropriately enough, "Geyser"), in which it is asked what might happen to a person if they stood on top of the Old Faithful geyser as it erupted.
|-
|156,817
|Fly a hot-air balloon over a firing range
|A hot air balloon could present an irresistible target to the people firing their weapons at the range. The balloon could be shot and you could fall to your death. See image on [https://what-if.xkcd.com/81/ this entry].
|-
|156,818
|Peel away the earth's crust
|This is a reference to an entry in the new book, and an image of what it would look like is shown in [[2575: What If? 2]], where a potato peeler is used to remove the crust of the Earth. Several *What If* blog posts also result in massive damage to the earth's crust, including what happened to Texas [https://what-if.xkcd.com/153/ here].

This is a reference to a chapter from the new book, which refers to removing the Earth's mass to lose weight.
|-
|156,819
|Try to paint the Sahara Desert by hand
|This would be [https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/ difficult] and require more paint than humanity has ever produced[https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/].
|-
|156,820
|Remove someone's bones without asking
|Possibly a reference to ''Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'', in which Professor Gilderoy Lockhart removes all the bones of Harry's arm (instead of merely fixing a broken bone).
|-
|156,821
|Spend 100% of your government's budget on mobile game in-app purchases
|A reference to one of the examples listed in [https://what-if.xkcd.com/108/ this post].
|-
|156,822
|Fill a lava lamp with actual lava
|A {{w|lava lamp}} is a glass lamp, which contains a wax mixture inside, and heats so that the wax rises and falls. Putting actual lava inside a regular lava lamp would most likely cause the lamp to melt and the glass to shatter, not to mention handling lava is very dangerous.{{citation needed}} However, in [https://what-if.xkcd.com/122/ this entry], Randall says it would be fairly easy to find a material that would be able to handle the heat of the lava and thus this would be rather anticlimactic.
|-
|156,823
|Drink the blood of someone with a viral hemorraghic (''sic'') fever
|Drinking someone else's blood is a bad idea unless you are a vampire. If someone has a {{w|viral hemorrhagic fever}}, it is much worse, as they have a very serious and likely deadly disease which can be transmitted by sharing bodily fluids, such as blood. Drinking blood is the theme of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/98/ this article].
|-
|156,824
|Eat meat from rabid animals
|Eating meat from rabid animals could give you {{w|rabies}}, a virus which is nearly always fatal if not treated prior to the appearance of initial symptoms. Pathogen contamination in cooked foods can persist on the surface of ''e.g.'' tongs, chopsticks, or a fork used to grill, which is why the USDA doesn't generally allow kitchen utensils to touch raw or ready to eat foods at all. Exceptions for utensils which touch only raw or partially cooked foods, such as grill spatulas and the like, are often allowed and can be negotiated on a case-by-case basis when they would otherwise be prohibited. The rabies virus permeates essentially all nerve tissue before symptoms appear.
|-
|156,825
|Perform your own laser eye surgery
|Refer to the end of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/82/ this article]
|-
|156,826
|Tell California poultry regulators that your farm is selling Pokemon eggs
|While issuing false statements to government regulators is a violation of both California and Federal law, for which prison sentences can reach ten and fines can reach ten thousand dollars plus any compensatory damages, as per [https://california.public.law/codes/ca_penal_code_section_132 California Penal Code § 132] and [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001 18 U.S. Code § 1001], there is some question about whether any competent regulatory authority would ever take such an assertion seriously, and whether they would be liable for greater damages for doing so than the potential liability of the original culprit involved. Actually doing this, even to county level regulators, could result in a series of events very disadvantageous to you, your farm, and your employees. However, declaring that you're producing Pokémon eggs to your local municipality is probably harmless, and likely to brighten the day of your local regulators.{{cn}}
|-
|156,827
|Funnel the entire flow of Niagara Falls into the open window of a physics lab
|Likely an oblique reference to the image near the end of [https://what-if.xkcd.com/147/ this article].
|-
|156,828
|Pump ammonia into your abdomen
|{{w|Ammonia}} is an [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPA_list_of_extremely_hazardous_substances extremely hazardous substance] and pumping it into your abdomen would result in a painful death.
|-
|156,829
|Suspend yourself inside a 10-meter ball of sunscreen and fall into the Sun
|Despite its name, sunscreen only protects against some types of radiation from the sun. No amount is going to be adequate protection if you are right inside the sun.{{Actual citation needed}} Also, sunscreen, being a gel, would evaporate when exposed to vacuum. When exposed to the plasma of the coronal surface or the Sun's interior, it would quickly ionize along with anything inside it, becoming plasma like the rest of the Sun.
|}

==Transcript==

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{{comic discussion}}

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

Talk:2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-12T22:52:57Z

Dextrous Fred: Explaining why I don't think I failed to read

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

<nowiki>#156,819</nowiki> looks like a reference to the Phineas and Ferb title sequence, and the episode Oil on Candace and probably more relevant here, What If 84. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.233|108.162.210.233]] 21:49, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
:It's true that it could be a reference, but I think I recognized most of the topics on the list as being mentioned in some what-if article from the archives--in the case of the "painting" one, https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 22:13, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
::I think that given that he learned about this doing his new book that has not been released yet most of the new items would first be clear when we read the book, and hence all references to old what if seems moot to me... In my opinion it seems that those writing the current explanation failed to read this sentence: ''Updates to my "Things You Should Not Do" list, based on what I learned writing What If? 2''!!! Taking this into acount nothing on the new list should be from the old what if blog/book. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
:::Many articles (roughly half) in the blog were published after the first book was written, so those references are fair game to be included in the new book, and thus valid references as things he learned in the interim. Take a look at the archive thumbnails for the articles in 2014. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 22:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
:I think <nowiki>#156,819</nowiki> is confusing because [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gustave_Guillaumet-_Le_Sahara.jpeg it's been done]. -- [[User:Ken g6|Ken g6]] ([[User talk:Ken g6|talk]]) 17:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'm assuming that a Sun-sized ball of sunscreen would collapse and ignite as a star, right? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.79|172.70.214.79]] 10:47, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-08T03:34:42Z

Dextrous Fred: Added more references

2669: Things You Should Not Do

2022-09-08T03:25:38Z

Dextrous Fred: Typo, sorry