explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2255: Tattoo Ideas

2020-01-15T06:26:42Z

Harodotus: Add comment about "Eurion Constellation"

"Changeme" made me think of FIXME or TODO of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comment_(computer_programming)#Tags [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.150|162.158.106.150]] 06:03, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

The "Eurion Constellation" is a constellation-like pattern of dots on paper currency that when detected, prevents photocopiers from making copies of the bills https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation

Talk:1830: ISS Solar Transit 2

2017-04-28T16:48:56Z

Harodotus: Added discussion of the ISS that is 4x the size of the Earth to account for apparent sizes.

Gees Randal, that's actually really dark.

Attempted explaining. It is not real, ... I hope {{[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.250|108.162.229.250]] 05:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)}}

costs would be astronomical. I see what you did there and I approve. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.118|162.158.92.118]] 07:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

:astronomical, good joke [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.216|141.101.105.216]] 09:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
: +1 [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:28, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Have to disagree on the Pink Floyd joke. I don't see it. [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 11:43, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

The diameter of the sun is 864,575.9 mi. In the first panel the ISS is about that far away. Second panel is about halfway, so 432,287.95 miles. According to [http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-07/how-close-could-person-get-sun-and-survive Popular Science], the ISS could probably make it to just over a million miles away before burning up (seeing as how the shuttle could make it ~1.3 million and I think the ISS has more protection), the "fwoosh" should be in the first panel. And in any matter, the sound effect should be a "sploosh" sound with the splashing visuals. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 13:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

If the impact were to really happen as shown, then one of two things must be true, either:
1) The ISS is really really large (eyeballing it as about 4x the size of the Earth vs. the size of the Sun as shown) or
2) The Sun is really smaller than we think and as close as the ISS's orbit.
In either case, the ISS would be likely to survive entry into the Sun's surface. If the former is true, this also makes replacing it twice a month all the more impressive. Go NASA!.[[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 16:48, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1665: City Talk Pages

2016-04-08T17:23:11Z

Harodotus: actual wiki talk links?

I redid the numbering in the transcript to be consistent with the comic. Unfortunately that added blank lines around the indented section, which looks a little awkward. Perhaps someone with better markup skills than me can fix it.[[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 16:51, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

So now does Wikipedia have to lock down every talk page to prevent xkcd-inspired vandalism edits? [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 17:14, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Aren't all of these points based on actual wikipedia talk pages? I came by to find the links to them. Maybe this is a big Whooosh for me, but i'd bet i'll not be the last person to think this. [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 17:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

1574: Trouble for Science

2015-09-08T04:03:31Z

Harodotus: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1574
| date = September 7, 2015
| title = Trouble for Science
| image = trouble_for_science.png
| titletext = Careful mathematical analysis demonstrates small-scale irregularities in Gaussian distribution
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|More details in each article, especially the one about antibodies and rodents.}}
The comic highlights the fact that several well-established, rather fundamental scientific methods and results have come under pressure in recent history due to newer findings which suggest that these methods are in fact not as well-proven and scientifically reliable as was previously believed. This leads to the impression that science might be in trouble, as implicated by the title. This is however greatly exaggerated by the last (fictional) headline, which suggests that Bunsen burners in fact have a cooling effect, which is of course absolutely ridiculous, but would nevertheless change one more fundamental scientific belief drastically.

The title of five scientific articles are shown:

;Many commercial antibody-based immunoassays are unreliable
This sentence is true. See Kebaneilwe Lebani, [http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:352531 Antibody Discovery for Development of a Serotyping Dengue Virus NS1 Capture Assay], 2014. In this PhD thesis, 11 references are given.

;Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance
p-value is the probability that an event is observed just by chance. If p-value is under a threshold level (''α'', usually <5%, or <1% for being more conservative) one can assume that the event observed "exists".
The value used for ''α'' has been proposed by [http://web.lru.dk/sites/lru.dk/files/lru/docs/kap9/kapitel_9_126_On_the_origins.pdf Fisher] and is completely arbitrary.

The use of p-values as a measure of statistical significance is frequently criticized, for example in [http://wiki.bio.dtu.dk/~agpe/papers/pval_notuseful.pdf Hubbard and Lindsay]. Randall has demonstrated this problem in the past in [[882: Significant]].
;Overfeeding of laboratory rodents compromises animal models

[http://tpx.sagepub.com/content/24/6/757.full.pdf Keenan et al.] makes this case.

;Replication study fails to reproduce many published results
A [https://explorable.com/replication-study Replication Study] is a study designed to replicate the results of a previous study by using the same methods for a different set of subjects and experimenters. It aims to recreate the results to gain confidence in the results of the previous study as well as ensuring that the findings of the previous study are transferable to other similar areas of study.

Randall is probably referring to this recent study: http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

;Controlled trials show Bunsen burners make things colder
This is a joke, but possible in high temperature cases. There is probably some methodological error if putting something over the Bunsen burner flame (which is between 1000K and 2000K) makes it colder. If that thing were already much hotter than the flame (more than 2000 Kelvin), the Bunsen Burner's flame would equalize the temperature between the flame and thing resulting in cooling.

;Careful mathematical analysis demonstrates small-scale irregularities in Gaussian distribution

This is another joke, as Gaussian samples are only approximated by the Gaussian distribution. The quality of the approximation grows with the size of the sample, but will never be exact, meaning it will show "irregularities" on a "small scale".

==Transcript==
:[Five panels, each with the top part of a scientific article, where only the title is readable. Below is the list of authors and subheading and text in unreadable wiggles.]

:Many Commercial Antibody-Based Immunoassays Are Unreliable

:Problems With the p-Value as an Indicator of Significance

:Overfeeding of Laboratory Rodents Compromises Animal Models

:Replication Study Fails to Reproduce Many Published Results

:Controlled Trials Show Bunsen Burners Make Things Colder

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Physics]]

1574: Trouble for Science

2015-09-08T04:03:05Z

Harodotus: /* Explanation */ changed wording of bunsen burner comment to increase clairity

{{comic
| number = 1574
| date = September 7, 2015
| title = Trouble for Science
| image = trouble_for_science.png
| titletext = Careful mathematical analysis demonstrates small-scale irregularities in Gaussian distribution
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|More details in each article, especially the one about antibodies and rodents.}}
The comic highlights the fact that several well-established, rather fundamental scientific methods and results have come under pressure in recent history due to newer findings which suggest that these methods are in fact not as well-proven and scientifically reliable as was previously believed. This leads to the impression that science might be in trouble, as implicated by the title. This is however greatly exaggerated by the last (fictional) headline, which suggests that Bunsen burners in fact have a cooling effect, which is of course absolutely ridiculous, but would nevertheless change one more fundamental scientific belief drastically.

The title of five scientific articles are shown:

;Many commercial antibody-based immunoassays are unreliable
This sentence is true. See Kebaneilwe Lebani, [http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:352531 Antibody Discovery for Development of a Serotyping Dengue Virus NS1 Capture Assay], 2014. In this PhD thesis, 11 references are given.

;Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance
p-value is the probability that an event is observed just by chance. If p-value is under a threshold level (''α'', usually <5%, or <1% for being more conservative) one can assume that the event observed "exists".
The value used for ''α'' has been proposed by [http://web.lru.dk/sites/lru.dk/files/lru/docs/kap9/kapitel_9_126_On_the_origins.pdf Fisher] and is completely arbitrary.

The use of p-values as a measure of statistical significance is frequently criticized, for example in [http://wiki.bio.dtu.dk/~agpe/papers/pval_notuseful.pdf Hubbard and Lindsay]. Randall has demonstrated this problem in the past in [[882: Significant]].
;Overfeeding of laboratory rodents compromises animal models

[http://tpx.sagepub.com/content/24/6/757.full.pdf Keenan et al.] makes this case.

;Replication study fails to reproduce many published results
A [https://explorable.com/replication-study Replication Study] is a study designed to replicate the results of a previous study by using the same methods for a different set of subjects and experimenters. It aims to recreate the results to gain confidence in the results of the previous study as well as ensuring that the findings of the previous study are transferable to other similar areas of study.

Randall is probably referring to this recent study: http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

;Controlled trials show Bunsen burners make things colder
This is a joke, but possible in high temperature case. There is probably some methodological error if putting something over the Bunsen burner flame (which is between 1000K and 2000K) makes it colder. If that thing were already much hotter than the flame (more than 2000 Kelvin), the Bunsen Burner's flame would equalize the temperature between the flame and thing resulting in cooling.

;Careful mathematical analysis demonstrates small-scale irregularities in Gaussian distribution

This is another joke, as Gaussian samples are only approximated by the Gaussian distribution. The quality of the approximation grows with the size of the sample, but will never be exact, meaning it will show "irregularities" on a "small scale".

==Transcript==
:[Five panels, each with the top part of a scientific article, where only the title is readable. Below is the list of authors and subheading and text in unreadable wiggles.]

:Many Commercial Antibody-Based Immunoassays Are Unreliable

:Problems With the p-Value as an Indicator of Significance

:Overfeeding of Laboratory Rodents Compromises Animal Models

:Replication Study Fails to Reproduce Many Published Results

:Controlled Trials Show Bunsen Burners Make Things Colder

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:1574: Trouble for Science

2015-09-07T23:58:39Z

Harodotus:

Sentence case, or down style, is one method, preferred by many print and online publications and recommended by the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. The only two rules are the two rules mentioned above: Capitalize the first word and all proper nouns. Everything else is in lowercase. http://www.dailywritingtips.com/rules-for-capitalization-in-titles/ [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.154|173.245.50.154]] 12:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

;Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance

The p-value alone can never be an indicator of significance. However, it is still often used as the only indicator, because a full set of parameters (including sample size, test setup, etc.) can't easily be packed into a single number. There's a nice article in nature about this problem: [http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700]
I can also recommend [http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800this story] about (ab-)using hacked p-values to get maximum publicity. I hope this helps :-) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.183|141.101.105.183]] 12:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:In this section, I really want to reword the p-valye explanation that "one can assume that the event observed 'exists'." Except where it's an event indirectly observed through a chained effect (unseeable gas molecules observed through brownian motion, unstable particles through detection of their decay particles, prehistoric meteorite impact through a geological/chemical fingerprint, etc) I think it should be more that "this (directly observed) event was directly linked to the presumed cause rather than spontaneous and random, at least w.r.t. the presumed cause being tested". But writing it better than I did just now. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.114|141.101.99.114]] 19:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I think the joke is that these newspapers are talking about how bad science is, and yet they manage to come up with a stupid story about Bunsen burners, presumably being too scientifically illiterate to know the problem. [[User:Timband|Timband]] ([[User talk:Timband|talk]]) 12:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC) Although reading the other comments, it's a much better joke if the Bunsen Burner story is actually true, because that makes all of them about journalists not realising that they are highlighting their own ignorance. [[User:Timband|Timband]] ([[User talk:Timband|talk]]) 16:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

See [[Significant]] for another comic on p-values.--[[User:Henke37|Henke37]] ([[User talk:Henke37|talk]]) 14:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

;Controlled trials show Bunsen burners make things colder
he
Actually, I can easily imagine a way to use a Bunsen burner to make something colder. Involving an unlit Bunsen burner that has been placed in the freezer for a couple hours, for example. Nowhere in the headline is there any mention of a flame. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 12:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

:Actually, there was a (badly formatted and badly placed, probably therefore now removed) comment on the explanation page earlier which pointed out that feeding a Bunsen burner from a propane bottle will cause the pressure, and therefore the temperature, in the bottle to decrease. That is a lot less contrived than my original idea. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 13:37, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

::That was me. Trying to get my 2 cents in on my phone before I forgot. http://www.propane101.com/propaneregulatorfreezing.htm as an example. [[User:Mattiep|Mattiep]] ([[User talk:Mattiep|talk]]) 13:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

:Correct me if i'm wrong here, but doesn't burning flame from a Bunsen burner cause the temperatures of the flame and the target object to equalize? Sure in most cases that results in a temperature increase in the target object, but I don't see why that would be true in all high temperature cases. The comment about "reducing the rate of heat loss in 2000K+ temp objects" would only be true if the gas (assuming any atmosphere at all) surrounding the target object was cooler than the flame from the bunsen burner. This gets worse in a perfect vacuum. If a 5000K object was in a perfect vacuum and somebody set a lit bunsen burner (assuming the tip had an Oxygen source) to spray across the target object, then the Flame would get hotter as it touched the hotter object and the object would cool as the two temperatures attempted to equalize. No reduction of heat loss would happen. Can we remove the comment about "reducing the rate of heat loss in 2000K+ temp objects" ? [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 22:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC).

::Found an article backing up my previous comment and lacking any objection for several hours, reveresed the note in the article.[http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2xr7dc/can_you_cool_an_object_hotter_than_fire_with_fire/] [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 23:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I think the joke is in the wording of the headlines. The fact that a replication study fails to reproduce can be seen as a contradiction. Overfeeding rodents leads to fat rodents. This compromises their ability to function als animal (runway) models. I haven't figured out the other ones yet. But that's çause I'm dumb :-). Alva. {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.80}}

:It's way simpler than that - The joke is that people outside of sciences (with no understanding really of how to science) will report basically anything that sounds shocking or exciting, especially if it proves those nerdy, scary scientists wrong! So Randall gives us a bunch of possibly headlines that to a layman read like real, scary news about science, but to scientists this is stuff that is generally well known and understood. The last one is just taking it a step further for credulous news editors - They've been lying to us all this time! 13:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::I think it's even simpler than that: the title is "Trouble for Science" and it shows a series of misleading headlines about misleading (i.e.: invalidated) scientific studies. The implication is "Trouble for Journalism".[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.87|173.245.54.87]] 14:21, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

:I agree. All of the titles are poorly written. All immunoassays are antibody-based, so saying many commercial antibody-based immunoassays are unreliable is redundant, implying they have no idea what an immunoassay is. Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance implies that there is some significant error in the use of a tool to measure significance of error, which leads one to wonder how they figured that out. If you don't know what a p-test is, the title is paradoxical. The last title would make someone assume that the controlled trials are using turned on bunsen burners to make things colder, but could mean almost anything, such as a bunsen burner being turned off the entire time, or a bunsen burner placed inside of a freezer, or even that people consider using bunsen burners in an experiment makes the experiment cool (or sweet or groovy or whatever).

1574: Trouble for Science

2015-09-07T23:55:42Z

Harodotus: /* Explanation */ reversed bad science in Bunsen burner comment

{{comic
| number = 1574
| date = September 7, 2015
| title = Trouble for Science
| image = trouble_for_science.png
| titletext = Careful mathematical analysis demonstrates small-scale irregularities in Gaussian distribution
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|More details in each article, especially the one about antibodies and rodents.}}
The comic highlights the fact that several well-established, rather fundamental scientific methods and results have come under pressure in recent history due to newer findings which suggest that these methods are in fact not as well-proven and scientifically reliable as was previously believed. This leads to the impression that science might be in trouble, as implicated by the title. This is however greatly exaggerated by the last (fictional) headline, which suggests that Bunsen burners in fact have a cooling effect, which is of course absolutely ridiculous, but would nevertheless change one more fundamental scientific belief drastically.

The title of five scientific articles are shown:

;Many commercial antibody-based immunoassays are unreliable
This sentence is true. See Kebaneilwe Lebani, [http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:352531 Antibody Discovery for Development of a Serotyping Dengue Virus NS1 Capture Assay], 2014. In this PhD thesis, 11 references are given.

;Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance
p-value is the probability that an event is observed just by chance. If p-value is under a threshold level (''α'', usually <5%, or <1% for being more conservative) one can assume that the event observed "exists".
The value used for ''α'' has been proposed by [http://web.lru.dk/sites/lru.dk/files/lru/docs/kap9/kapitel_9_126_On_the_origins.pdf Fisher] and is completely arbitrary.

The use of p-values as a measure of statistical significance is frequently criticized, for example in [http://wiki.bio.dtu.dk/~agpe/papers/pval_notuseful.pdf Hubbard and Lindsay]. Randall has demonstrated this problem in the past in [[882: Significant]].
;Overfeeding of laboratory rodents compromises animal models

[http://tpx.sagepub.com/content/24/6/757.full.pdf Keenan et al.] makes this case.

;Replication study fails to reproduce many published results
A [https://explorable.com/replication-study Replication Study] is a study designed to replicate the results of a previous study by using the same methods for a different set of subjects and experimenters. It aims to recreate the results to gain confidence in the results of the previous study as well as ensuring that the findings of the previous study are transferable to other similar areas of study.

Randall is probably referring to this recent study: http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

;Controlled trials show Bunsen burners make things colder
This is a joke. There is probably some methodological error if putting something over the Bunsen burner flame (which is between 1000K and 2000K) makes it colder. If that thing were already much hotter than the flame (more than 2000 Kelvin), the Bunsen Burner's flame would equalize the temperature between the flame and thing.

Title text:

;Careful mathematical analysis demonstrates small-scale irregularities in Gaussian distribution

This is another joke, as Gaussian samples are only approximated by the Gaussian distribution. The quality of the approximation grows with the size of the sample, but will never be exact, meaning it will show "irregularities" on a "small scale".

==Transcript==
:[Five panels, each with the top part of a scientific article, where only the title is readable. Below is the list of authors and subheading and text in unreadable wiggles.]

:Many Commercial Antibody-Based Immunoassays Are Unreliable

:Problems With the p-Value as an Indicator of Significance

:Overfeeding of Laboratory Rodents Compromises Animal Models

:Replication Study Fails to Reproduce Many Published Results

:Controlled Trials Show Bunsen Burners Make Things Colder

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Physics]]

Talk:1574: Trouble for Science

2015-09-07T22:20:22Z

Harodotus: Question about the comment about "reducing the rate of heat loss in 2000K+ temp objects"

Sentence case, or down style, is one method, preferred by many print and online publications and recommended by the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. The only two rules are the two rules mentioned above: Capitalize the first word and all proper nouns. Everything else is in lowercase. http://www.dailywritingtips.com/rules-for-capitalization-in-titles/ [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.154|173.245.50.154]] 12:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

;Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance

The p-value alone can never be an indicator of significance. However, it is still often used as the only indicator, because a full set of parameters (including sample size, test setup, etc.) can't easily be packed into a single number. There's a nice article in nature about this problem: [http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700]
I can also recommend [http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800this story] about (ab-)using hacked p-values to get maximum publicity. I hope this helps :-) --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.183|141.101.105.183]] 12:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:In this section, I really want to reword the p-valye explanation that "one can assume that the event observed 'exists'." Except where it's an event indirectly observed through a chained effect (unseeable gas molecules observed through brownian motion, unstable particles through detection of their decay particles, prehistoric meteorite impact through a geological/chemical fingerprint, etc) I think it should be more that "this (directly observed) event was directly linked to the presumed cause rather than spontaneous and random, at least w.r.t. the presumed cause being tested". But writing it better than I did just now. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.114|141.101.99.114]] 19:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I think the joke is that these newspapers are talking about how bad science is, and yet they manage to come up with a stupid story about Bunsen burners, presumably being too scientifically illiterate to know the problem. [[User:Timband|Timband]] ([[User talk:Timband|talk]]) 12:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC) Although reading the other comments, it's a much better joke if the Bunsen Burner story is actually true, because that makes all of them about journalists not realising that they are highlighting their own ignorance. [[User:Timband|Timband]] ([[User talk:Timband|talk]]) 16:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

See [[Significant]] for another comic on p-values.--[[User:Henke37|Henke37]] ([[User talk:Henke37|talk]]) 14:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

;Controlled trials show Bunsen burners make things colder
he
Actually, I can easily imagine a way to use a Bunsen burner to make something colder. Involving an unlit Bunsen burner that has been placed in the freezer for a couple hours, for example. Nowhere in the headline is there any mention of a flame. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 12:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

:Actually, there was a (badly formatted and badly placed, probably therefore now removed) comment on the explanation page earlier which pointed out that feeding a Bunsen burner from a propane bottle will cause the pressure, and therefore the temperature, in the bottle to decrease. That is a lot less contrived than my original idea. --[[User:Svenman|Svenman]] ([[User talk:Svenman|talk]]) 13:37, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

::That was me. Trying to get my 2 cents in on my phone before I forgot. http://www.propane101.com/propaneregulatorfreezing.htm as an example. [[User:Mattiep|Mattiep]] ([[User talk:Mattiep|talk]]) 13:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

:Correct me if i'm wrong here, but doesn't burning flame from a Bunsen burner cause the temperatures of the flame and the target object to equalize? Sure in most cases that results in a temperature increase in the target object, but I don't see why that would be true in all high temperature cases. The comment about "reducing the rate of heat loss in 2000K+ temp objects" would only be true if the gas (assuming any atmosphere at all) surrounding the target object was cooler than the flame from the bunsen burner. This gets worse in a perfect vacuum. If a 5000K object was in a perfect vacuum and somebody set a lit bunsen burner (assuming the tip had an Oxygen source) to spray across the target object, then the Flame would get hotter as it touched the hotter object and the object would cool as the two temperatures attempted to equalize. No reduction of heat loss would happen. Can we remove the comment about "reducing the rate of heat loss in 2000K+ temp objects" ? [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 22:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I think the joke is in the wording of the headlines. The fact that a replication study fails to reproduce can be seen as a contradiction. Overfeeding rodents leads to fat rodents. This compromises their ability to function als animal (runway) models. I haven't figured out the other ones yet. But that's çause I'm dumb :-). Alva. {{unsigned ip|141.101.104.80}}

:It's way simpler than that - The joke is that people outside of sciences (with no understanding really of how to science) will report basically anything that sounds shocking or exciting, especially if it proves those nerdy, scary scientists wrong! So Randall gives us a bunch of possibly headlines that to a layman read like real, scary news about science, but to scientists this is stuff that is generally well known and understood. The last one is just taking it a step further for credulous news editors - They've been lying to us all this time! 13:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::I think it's even simpler than that: the title is "Trouble for Science" and it shows a series of misleading headlines about misleading (i.e.: invalidated) scientific studies. The implication is "Trouble for Journalism".[[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.87|173.245.54.87]] 14:21, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

:I agree. All of the titles are poorly written. All immunoassays are antibody-based, so saying many commercial antibody-based immunoassays are unreliable is redundant, implying they have no idea what an immunoassay is. Problems with the p-value as an indicator of significance implies that there is some significant error in the use of a tool to measure significance of error, which leads one to wonder how they figured that out. If you don't know what a p-test is, the title is paradoxical. The last title would make someone assume that the controlled trials are using turned on bunsen burners to make things colder, but could mean almost anything, such as a bunsen burner being turned off the entire time, or a bunsen burner placed inside of a freezer, or even that people consider using bunsen burners in an experiment makes the experiment cool (or sweet or groovy or whatever).

Talk:1567: Kitchen Tips

2015-08-21T10:45:43Z

Harodotus: comment on the intended meaning

Does the title text refer to Cueball never ripping a sheet of toilet paper off, just putting the end of the roll in the toilet and flushing, making it unroll? [[User:Thomasa88|Thomasa88]] ([[User talk:Thomasa88|talk]]) 05:16, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

-Not quite, I think. I got the impression that cueball wiped with the ''whole roll,'' then simply shoved the entire thing down the toilet. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.72|199.27.128.72]] 05:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Is Cueball really hosting a show here? I would think of this comic as a series of commercials or a vlog series rather than a TV show. Just my opinion. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.156|199.27.133.156]] 05:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
:Maybe it's also meant to mock the so-called kitchen-hacks articles. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.56|108.162.225.56]] 07:01, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The implication is that the the first tip: "If you want to know the temperature of something, use a thermometer designed to measure its temperature", is as obvious as the other four ridiculous 'tips'.[[User:Zeimusu|Zeimusu]] ([[User talk:Zeimusu|talk]]) 07:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

:Zeimusu's comment goes to what i think is the real point of this comic. I came here since i wanted to know '''''why'''''. It is a commentary on the stupidity of not using the obvious and sane methods of household activities. There are a lot of really ''odd'' tips for households, including "unspooling two ply toilet paper to have each roll last twice as long" of which the "whole roll" usage is a parody. [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 10:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The last tip would result in the freezer door being very hard to open as it becomes jammed with ice. Try it! [[Special:Contributions/188.114.102.11|188.114.102.11]] 08:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1567: Kitchen Tips

2015-08-21T10:44:38Z

Harodotus: comment on the intended meaning

Does the title text refer to Cueball never ripping a sheet of toilet paper off, just putting the end of the roll in the toilet and flushing, making it unroll? [[User:Thomasa88|Thomasa88]] ([[User talk:Thomasa88|talk]]) 05:16, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

-Not quite, I think. I got the impression that cueball wiped with the ''whole roll,'' then simply shoved the entire thing down the toilet. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.72|199.27.128.72]] 05:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Is Cueball really hosting a show here? I would think of this comic as a series of commercials or a vlog series rather than a TV show. Just my opinion. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.156|199.27.133.156]] 05:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
:Maybe it's also meant to mock the so-called kitchen-hacks articles. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.56|108.162.225.56]] 07:01, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The implication is that the the first tip: "If you want to know the temperature of something, use a thermometer designed to measure its temperature", is as obvious as the other four ridiculous 'tips'.[[User:Zeimusu|Zeimusu]] ([[User talk:Zeimusu|talk]]) 07:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

:Zeimusu's comment goes to what i think is the real point of this comic. I came here since i wanted to know '''why'''''Italic text'' . It is a commentary on the stupidity of not using the obvious and sane methods of household activities. There are a lot of really ''odd'' tips for households, including "unspooling two ply toilet paper to have each roll last twice as long" of which the "whole roll" usage is a parody. [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]]) 10:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The last tip would result in the freezer door being very hard to open as it becomes jammed with ice. Try it! [[Special:Contributions/188.114.102.11|188.114.102.11]] 08:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1520: Degree-Off

2015-05-04T07:17:41Z

Harodotus: Clarification about Pestilence

I assume "''Your'' field gathered in the desert to create a new one." refers to the Manhattan Project?
:Yes [[User:Jachra|Jachra]] ([[User talk:Jachra|talk]]) 06:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Chem wants absolutely no part of this conversation. [[User:Jachra|Jachra]] ([[User talk:Jachra|talk]]) 06:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are: Conquest, War, Famine, and Death. Is she claiming that her heros have conquered death? [[User:Capncanuck|Capncanuck]] ([[User talk:Capncanuck|talk]]) 06:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Pestilence is often associated with infectious disease and plague, i assume that what's being referred to. [[User:Harodotus|Harodotus]] ([[User talk:Harodotus|talk]])

also a possible reference to: https://xkcd.com/435/ ?

Talk:1520: Degree-Off

2015-05-04T07:16:55Z

Harodotus: Eliminated incorrectly formated posting of mine

I assume "''Your'' field gathered in the desert to create a new one." refers to the Manhattan Project?
:Yes [[User:Jachra|Jachra]] ([[User talk:Jachra|talk]]) 06:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Chem wants absolutely no part of this conversation. [[User:Jachra|Jachra]] ([[User talk:Jachra|talk]]) 06:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are: Conquest, War, Famine, and Death. Is she claiming that her heros have conquered death? [[User:Capncanuck|Capncanuck]] ([[User talk:Capncanuck|talk]]) 06:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

also a possible reference to: https://xkcd.com/435/ ?

1465: xkcd Phone 2

2014-12-26T20:30:43Z

Harodotus: /* Explanation */ fixed broken link for Fitbit (vs FitBit)

{{comic
| number = 1465
| date = December 26, 2014
| title = xkcd Phone 2
| image = xkcd_phone_2.png
| titletext = Washable, though only once.
}}

==Explanation==

This is a followup to [[1363: xkcd Phone]], which debuted the original xkcd phone. Like xkcd Phone "1", this comic parodies modern smartphone advertising with a promotional image for a fictional phone. Like the previous xkcd phone, the comic touts a variety of features which are either pointless, misleading, or physically impossible. They are clockwise, from the top left:

*'''MaxHD: Over 350 pixels per screen''': 350 pixels is not very impressive: Each would be about 0.5×0.5 cm. Even if it implies 350 pixels along the edge this is still less than standard definition TV (PAL gives 576 lines of horizontal resolution). Likely a reference to HD+, FullHD, QuadHD and other marketing expressions for screen resolutions, by which common users are often confused. In [[732: HDTV]] Randall has observered that HD is not an especially high resolution, when compared with computer monitors.
: ''Note:'' Retina display (high pixel density display) for smartphones is 326 pixels per '''''inch''''', not per '''''screen'''''.
*'''Always on Speaker''': An always on microphone is a genuine feature. It allows speech control software such as "Okay Google" or "Siri" to respond without having to be turned on. An always on speaker would be less useful especially if it implies the phone is always making noise.
*'''Blood Pressure reliever''': This appears to be where a real phone would have its front facing camera. This could imply that it's a sharp part that you can cut yourself on, thus '''''relieving''''' your blood pressure, or else implying that the other features of the phone are so frustrating that a feature was required to relieve the users' blood pressure.
*'''Auto-Rotating Case:''' Phones often feature an "auto-rotating screen", meaning that the display switches between portrait and landscape mode depending on its orientation with respect to gravity. But the case is a physical part of the phone, so making a case that did '''not''' "auto-rotate" with the phone would be the real challenge.
*'''Ribbed:''' A reference to ribbed {{w|condom}}s, which are often advertised as superior to standard ones because the texture can be more physically stimulating to the genitalia. Some other objects can be advertised with the word ribbed as well, but mostly in the context where it allows a firmer grip on the device when wet. Since phones are usually not meant to be used wet it is still a fairly useless feature.
*'''Waterproof (inside only)''': Waterproofing is done to the outside to prevent water from getting in, not to prevent water from escaping.
*'''Googleable''': Another non-feature. Advertising as ...able is a way for marketing to add features, without adding features. This may be (for example) a recyclable paper bag: paper is normally recyclable. Any term may be 'googled' so being "googleable" is not an actual feature.
*'''Cheek toucher''': The screen will touch your cheek when making a hand-held phone call.
*'''Cries if lost:''' Actually useful function, for it would help the owner find the cellphone in case it was lost. It refers to people's habit of calling their own cellphones to help find it. It also resembles the first xkcd phone's functions of 'Screaming when falling' and 'Saying hi when lit'.
*'''Bug drawer:''' This is most likely the cover for other ports, though looks like a small drawer, capable of only holding bug-sized items. Possibly a joke on software bugs, which would, being virtual rather than physical, easily fit inside this area. One might also introduce bugs to your phone in this way. May also be a reference to "Phone may attract/trap insects; this is normal" from the original ''xkcd Phone'' comic.
*'''Coin slot:''' In most phones, this would be the charging port. Payphones have coin slots.
*'''Scroll lock:''' A computer key on most keyboards which is practically never used. (Despite [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/978 a previous xkcd strip] it was not invented by {{w|Steven Chu}}.)
*'''OS by Stackoverflow®:''' [http://stackoverflow.com/ Stackoverflow.com] is a very useful and popular question/answer forum for programmers, and many recent software products probably have benefited from advice given there, so Randall may be giving credit where credit really is due. Or it may be a reference to the rampant problem of code reuse, where programmers use the pre-written code on StackOverflow rather than writing their own, regardless of the fact that the code on StackOverflow may contain bugs or otherwise cause problems for their specific program.
*'''3D Materials:''' All real materials are three-dimensional, so this feature is not special.
*'''Dog Noticer''': Alerts the user to nearby dogs.
*'''FitBit® Fitness Evaluator''': {{w|Fitbit}} make wristbands that measure heartrate, count user steps, and act as an aid to planning an exercise program. This comic is published on Boxing Day 2014 and is relevant as Fitbits are a popular Holiday Gift at this time.
*'''Volume and density control:''' A play on words between {{w|volume (disambiguation)|volume}} as in speaker loudness, and {{w|volume}} as in a physical property inversely related to {{w|density}}. Apparently this would allow the user to change the size of the phone (which would indeed be a very useful feature, [[1422: My Phone is Dying|or a very worrying one]]), thus changing the volume and the density. Note that some computer mice have a feature where the user can put weights inside the case to customise the weight and thus affect the density in a different way.
*'''It is washable but only once''' (the title text): The phone can physically be washed, however after the first time doing this the phone will cease to function.

==Transcript==
:[An image of a smartphone. Coming off from it are many labels. Clockwise, from the top left they are:]
:MaxHD: Over 350 pixels per screen
:Always-on speaker
:Blood pressure reliever
:Auto-rotating case
:Ribbed
:Waterproof (interior only)
:Googleable
:Cheek toucher
:Cries if lost
:Bug drawer
:Coin slot
:Scroll lock
:OS by Stackoverflow®
:3D materials
:Dog noticer
:FitBit® fitness evaluator
:Volume and density control

:[Below the phone:]
:Introducing
:'''The xkcd phone 2'''
:A phone for your other hand®

{{comic discussion}}

1283: Headlines

2013-10-28T07:08:17Z

Harodotus: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 1283
| date = October 28, 2013
| title = Headlines
| image = headlines.png
| titletext = 1916: 'PHYSICIST DAD' TURNS HIS ATTENTION TO GRAVITY, AND YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT HE FINDS. [PICS] [NSFW]
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete}}
"Getting more clicks" is a common goal in news and blog sites, where more entries mean greater popularity. To achieve that goal, the editor give different articles outrageous headlines, which Randall parodies in this comic. These headlines are designed to make the story sound so unbelievable the reader has to check out the details for himself.

*1905 is when Albert Einstein published his {{w|Annus Mirabilis papers}}, which laid the groundwork for much of modern physics.
*1912 is the year of the the {{w|sinking of the RMS Titanic}}.
*1920 is the year that the {{w|Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution}} was passed, guaranteeing voting rights for women in all US states.
*1928 is when {{w|penicillin}} was discovered.
*1929 is a reference to the {{w|Wall Street Crash of 1929}}, the largest stock market crash in history and the beginning of the Great Depression.
*1945 is the year that World War 2 ended. It's also the year that many war crimes committed by Nazi Germany were discovered or declassified.
*1948 is when the Soviet Union established the {{w|Berlin Blockade}}, preventing food and other critical supplies from reaching occupied Berlin. In response, Western forces organized the {{w|Berlin Airlift}}.
*1955 is the year that the {{w|Polio vaccine}} was developed.
*1957 is when the Soviet Union launched {{w|Sputnik 1}}, the world's first artificial satellite.
*1968 is the year that {{w|Martin Luther King Jr.}} and {{w|Robert F. Kennedy}} were both assassinated.
*1969 is the year that {{w|Apollo 11}} performed the first manned lunar landing.
*1986 is when the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded one minute into its launch. See {{w|Space Shuttle Challenger disaster}} for details.
*1989 marked the {{w|Fall of the Berlin Wall}}.

Title text:
*1916 is when {{w|Karl Schwarzschild}} found a solution to Einstein field equations, which describes the gravitational field of a point mass and a spherical mass, more commonly known now as a "{{w|Black hole}}" (thus the humorous reference to Not Safe For Work Pictures)

==Transcript==
:20th Century Headlines
:Rewritten to get more clicks

:1905 - How a shocking new theory, discovered by a dad, proves scientists are wrong about ''everything!''
:1912 - 6 ''Titanic'' survivors who should have died
:1920 - 17 things that will be outlawed now that women can vote
:1928 - This one weird mold kills all germs
:1929 - Most embarrassing reactions to the stock market crash [GIFS]
:1945 - These 9 Nazi atrocities will make you lose faith in humanity
:1948 - 5 insane plans for feeding West Berlin you won't believe are real
:1955 - Avoid Polio with this one weird trick
:1957 - 12 nip slips potentially visible to Sputnik
:1968 - This year's assassinations ranked from most to least tragic
:1969 - This is the most important photo of an astronaut you'll see all day
:1986 - This video of a terminally ill child watching the ''Challenger'' launch will break your heart
:1989 - You won't ''believe'' what these people did to the Berlin wall! [video]
:Jan 1, 1990 - 500 signs you're a 90s kid

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

1283: Headlines

2013-10-28T07:07:46Z

Harodotus: /* Explanation */ added explanation of subtext (although there may be some debate on if the paper was published in 1915

{{comic
| number = 1283
| date = October 28, 2013
| title = Headlines
| image = headlines.png
| titletext = 1916: 'PHYSICIST DAD' TURNS HIS ATTENTION TO GRAVITY, AND YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT HE FINDS. [PICS] [NSFW]
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete}}
"Getting more clicks" is a common goal in news and blog sites, where more entries mean greater popularity. To achieve that goal, the editor give different articles outrageous headlines, which Randall parodies in this comic. These headlines are designed to make the story sound so unbelievable the reader has to check out the details for himself.

*1905 is when Albert Einstein published his {{w|Annus Mirabilis papers}}, which laid the groundwork for much of modern physics.
*1912 is the year of the the {{w|sinking of the RMS Titanic}}.
*1920 is the year that the {{w|Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution}} was passed, guaranteeing voting rights for women in all US states.
*1928 is when {{w|penicillin}} was discovered.
*1929 is a reference to the {{w|Wall Street Crash of 1929}}, the largest stock market crash in history and the beginning of the Great Depression.
*1945 is the year that World War 2 ended. It's also the year that many war crimes committed by Nazi Germany were discovered or declassified.
*1948 is when the Soviet Union established the {{w|Berlin Blockade}}, preventing food and other critical supplies from reaching occupied Berlin. In response, Western forces organized the {{w|Berlin Airlift}}.
*1955 is the year that the {{w|Polio vaccine}} was developed.
*1957 is when the Soviet Union launched {{w|Sputnik 1}}, the world's first artificial satellite.
*1968 is the year that {{w|Martin Luther King Jr.}} and {{w|Robert F. Kennedy}} were both assassinated.
*1969 is the year that {{w|Apollo 11}} performed the first manned lunar landing.
*1986 is when the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded one minute into its launch. See {{w|Space Shuttle Challenger disaster}} for details.
*1989 marked the {{w|Fall of the Berlin Wall}}.

Subtext:
*1916 is when {{w|Karl Schwarzschild}} found a solution to Einstein field equations, which describes the gravitational field of a point mass and a spherical mass, more commonly known now as a "{{w|Black hole}}" (thus the humorous reference to Not Safe For Work Pictures)

==Transcript==
:20th Century Headlines
:Rewritten to get more clicks

:1905 - How a shocking new theory, discovered by a dad, proves scientists are wrong about ''everything!''
:1912 - 6 ''Titanic'' survivors who should have died
:1920 - 17 things that will be outlawed now that women can vote
:1928 - This one weird mold kills all germs
:1929 - Most embarrassing reactions to the stock market crash [GIFS]
:1945 - These 9 Nazi atrocities will make you lose faith in humanity
:1948 - 5 insane plans for feeding West Berlin you won't believe are real
:1955 - Avoid Polio with this one weird trick
:1957 - 12 nip slips potentially visible to Sputnik
:1968 - This year's assassinations ranked from most to least tragic
:1969 - This is the most important photo of an astronaut you'll see all day
:1986 - This video of a terminally ill child watching the ''Challenger'' launch will break your heart
:1989 - You won't ''believe'' what these people did to the Berlin wall! [video]
:Jan 1, 1990 - 500 signs you're a 90s kid

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