explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3189: Conic Sections

2026-01-03T14:17:54Z

Matchups: Spelling fix

{{comic
| number = 3189
| date = January 2, 2026
| title = Conic Sections
| image = conic_sections_2x.png
| imagesize = 288x322px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They're not generally used for crewed spacecraft because astronauts HATE going around the corners.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by a section through a scone. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
A {{w|Kepler orbit}} describes the simplified motion of two celestial objects around each other. Such an orbit will form a {{w|conic section}}. A conic section is a curve obtained from a cone's surface intersecting a plane. The three types of conic section are the hyperbola, the parabola, and the ellipse; the circle is a special case of the ellipse, though it was sometimes considered a fourth type. In reality, this model is based only on their basic gravitational forces and ignores any other factors such as the gravity of other objects, atmospheric drag, each object being a non-spherical(/non-point) body and any {{w|Relativistic angular momentum#Orbital 3d angular_momentum|relativistic effects}}, but it serves as the basis for most orbital calculations before further refining with the most relevant additional perturbations.

[[File:TypesOfConicSections.jpg|thumb|alt=Example conic sections|How conic sections emerge from various planar intersections with bidirectional cones, which technically continue beyond the 'top' and 'bottom' of each diagram.]]The conic section as depicted in the comic will be familiar to many readers, since models illustrating these curves using a cone with a base are commonplace and anyone who has learned about these curves in a mathematics class is likely to have seen one.

In real conic sections, the cone extends to infinity. In the comic, however, the "conic section" representing the satellite's orbit has been assumed to have a base at a distance that inconveniently coincides with the presumed otherwise eliptical path, resulting in sharp corners where the angled planar section through the cone meets that base. As alluded to in the title text, these corners would be extremely uncomfortable for an astronaut in a crewed spacecraft. Such an extreme and sudden change in direction would require a very large, potentially dangerous, G-force.

Being in a free orbit necessarily means following an ellipse (or very similar, outside of the mathematically strict {{w|two-body problem}}) without ''any'' experienced net acceleration, as adding up the forces due to external gravity and your path's continually changing direction will zero out. Being forced off this ellipse to move across the totally imaginary and arbitrary conic-base would force an instantaneous acute change of direction for no other reason than to follow the imperfectly understood mathematical 'model' at two arbitrary points (reaching the baseline and rejoining the true curve again), which would technically require infinite acceleration each time. Alternately, deliberately 'cutting the corner' would require the best effort of the spacecraft to stick to the truncated-orbital path, requiring as much complex and wasteful thrusting as the craft could provide (which any occupants must endure), including the less uncomfortable but still forceful passage along the 'straight' bit of the orbit through the curved gravitational field of the parent body.

{{clear}}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
:[A view of the Earth, focused on Asia and the Indian Ocean with East Africa at left and the Western Pacific and Australia at right. A satellite is shown in an unusual orbit around the planet.]
:[Caption below the panel:]
:All Keplerian orbits are conic sections. For example, this one uses the base of the cone.
{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Space]]
[[Category:Geometry]]

3148: 100% All Achievements

2025-09-30T13:13:35Z

Matchups: Add more numbers about uploading really long videos.

{{comic
| number = 3148
| date = September 29, 2025
| title = 100% All Achievements
| image = 100_all_achievements_2x.png
| imagesize = 271x475px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I'm trying to share my footage of the full run to prove it's not tool-assisted, but the uploader has problems with video lengths of more than a decade.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created recently. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
100% All Achievements is a category of {{w|Speedrunning|video game speedruns}} where the goal is to do everything possible in the game, as fast as possible, while getting all achievements. (Many games have a progress bar to track completion of the game, making the "100%" criterion officially defined.) Cueball is attempting a 100% all achievements run for his university, which is a ridiculous pursuit for several reasons. Even though 100% runs for video games can take very long (up to [https://www.speedrun.com/baten_kaitos_eternal_wings_and_the_lost_ocean?h=100&x=mke7v926 two weeks]), they don't even come close to the amount of time needed to complete a single university major, let alone every class. This would be prohibitively expensive for most people due to the high costs of university attendance. Moreover, "All Achievements" is vaguely defined in this scenario, since the "achievements" possible at a university will change over the period of time involved in the given scenario, as courses are updated, revalidated, added and removed every year in a typical institution (whereas, even if the possible achievements on a videogame change as updates and DLC are released, it is possible to specify a particular version of the game used for the speedrun).

In traditional speedrunning, a {{w|tool-assisted speedrun}} is one done with software such as a video game emulator to perform incredibly precise movements. Such tools generally do not exist for real-life pursuits such as education, so Cueball may have meant using artificial intelligence or similar "cheats" to illegitimately complete his work. Unassisted speedruns are typically reviewed in full by a moderator of the speedrunning community for that game, to ensure there truly were no tools involved. There is no known community for university speedrunning,{{Citation needed}} so no moderators will be able to review the years of footage to determine whether the speedrun was legitimate.

Most video-sharing services limit the length of uploaded videos, either by size or length, for a variety of reasons. A decade-long video file is almost certainly too big for any service--an hour of video is about one gigabyte [[https://www.overcasthq.com/blog/how-big-are-video-files/ Overcast]], so a decade would be about 100 terabytes); currently the longest video on Youtube is just under 600 hours [[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12095652/trivia/ IMDB]], under 1% of what Cueball wants. Such a video would require significant infrastructure support by the service for it to be allowed, not to mention presenting challenges to recording and storing it in the first place.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
:[Cueball, arms outstretched, is talking to White Hat.]
:Cueball: I finished all the gen-ed back in 2010, and I'm up to the 400-level courses in most departments.
:Cueball: But now one of my advisors is saying I "can't have more than 20 majors" and "need to graduate next year."
:Cueball: It's outrageous!

:[Caption below the panel:]
:My university is making it really hard to finish a 100% all achievements speedrun.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]

2943: Unsolved Chemistry Problems

2024-06-09T13:00:07Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Fix tyop

{{comic
| number = 2943
| date = June 7, 2024
| title = Unsolved Chemistry Problems
| image = unsolved_chemistry_problems_2x.png
| imagesize = 361x386px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I'm an H⁺ denier, in that I refuse to consider loose protons to be real hydrogen, so I personally believe it stands for 'pretend'.
}}

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

There is a list of mathematical problems that are yet to be solved (such as P=NP). This comic makes a spin on it, by stating that there are (as of yet) unsolved chemistry problems. The scientist at what is apparently the "grand opening" of a new chemistry lab lists several real chemistry problems, followed by one also-unsolved-but-less-scientific problem (the p in pH)

'''Arbitrary Enzyme Design:'''

{{w|Enzymes}} are catalytic proteins. Enzyme catalysis is often unique in comparison with other catalysis methods as it is highly specific, or tailored to a specific reaction. As such, enzyme catalysis, besides being the basis of all biochemical processes, is becoming increasing relevant to industrial synthesis processes. As enzymes can be easily synthetically produced through recombinant gene technology, being able to design an arbitrary enzyme for any reaction means that effectively any reaction can be relatively easily catalyzed, revolutionizing the chemical synthesis industry.

'''Protein Folding:'''

{{w|Protein|Proteins}} are large molecules that consist of chains of amino acids. These amino acids chains become {{w|Protein Folding|folded}} in extremely complex ways into intricate 3D structures, and the way a protein is folded is of critical importance to its function. Because of the huge importance of proteins to biological life, biologists have devoted significant attention over many decades to the problem of {{w|Protein structure prediction|protein structure prediction}}. This refers to the ability to predict the 3D structure of a protein based on the amino acid sequence, and remains one of the most important problems in computational biology. The ability to predict protein structure purely from amino acid sequence, the so-called "de novo" prediction, is known in computational biology as an unusually difficult problem due to the complexity of amino acid chains. Known as "Levinthal's paradox," the number of possible conformations from the backbone conformations alone is estimated to have in the ballpark of 10^300 different conformations. Despite this, protein folding occurs extremely quickly in reality. Because of this difficulty in sampling conformations, even with optimization, such as secondary structure prediction and Monte Carlo simulation, a "true" accurate simulation is extremely computationally expensive. Because of this, the most accurate solutions, such as AlphaFold, utilize a combination of homology modeling - sampling experimentally determined proteins with similar sequences to infer structural motifs and similarities - and deep learning to accurately guess protein structure.

'''Depolymerization:'''

Polymers are very large molecules formed out of repeating subunits called monomers. Monomers are molecules, typically organic in nature, that can bond with at least 2 other molecules, making long chains or networks. That process is known as polymerization. Depolymerization is breaking down polymers into the small molecules they were originally made from. This is done through a variety of processes such as using radiation, electrolysis, adding chemicals, and other means. Plastics are the best-known polymers, but cellulose, proteins, and DNA are also technically polymers. The huge number of varieties and mixtures in plastics makes recycling them a huge challenge, and there is increasing concern about plastic waste damaging the environment.

Polymerization is usually exothermic, releasing energy as heat. To reverse this would require adding energy, in a targeted way. Simply ''destroying'' a polymer, by means of highly-reactive chemicals, heat, or radiation, doesn't generally release the monomer molecules to a significant degree; most of the reaction products are highly degraded. Most polymers are made by a process of catalysis, with the small monomer molecules interacting via a catalyst structure, often in liquid form, and the eventual product is usually solid. To reverse this would require getting the catalyst to interact in a very precise way with the solid polymer, and it's relatively difficult for the catalyst structure to get into the proper configuration with the solid tangled polymer molecules.

Another highly-desired depolymerization process would be to convert cellulose into its component glucose molecules. That glucose could then be used for a variety of different purposes, including fermentation to alcohol to use as a fuel. Currently, when plants are grown, much of the solar energy and carbon dioxide they absorb ends up in the form of cellulose rather than as starch, sugar, protein, or other substances that we find useful. Our being able to make use of the cellulose would make farming much more energy-efficient. Some organisms are able to depolymerize cellulose by means of enzymes, but our ability to use similar processes on an industrial scale is still limited. (Those organisms use a complex multi-step biochemical process which essentially "invests" energy into splitting off a glucose molecule, then recoups the investment by metabolizing the glucose.) It's also possible to depolymerize cellulose at high temperature and pressure using nothing more than water and acid, but that process is energy-intensive. It ''might'' be possible to do it with a solar-heated reactor.

'''What the “p” in pH stands for:'''

“p” shows up in pH, pKa, pKb, and other things related to the concentration of H+ ions and OH- ions. The meaning of the "p" in "pH" has been the subject of much dispute. It is sometimes referred to as "power of Hydrogen", but the term was introduced by {{w|Søren Peter Lauritz Sørensen|Søren Peter Lauritz Sørensen}}, who did not publish his results in English, and more accurately translates as "hydric exponent". The letter p could stand for the French puissance, German Potenz, or Danish potens, all referring to the concept of the "exponent" in exponential functions. (In English, unlike the previous languages, "potency" is not used to refer to the mathematical exponent. Potency can also be used to mean "power", or it could mean "potential".) All of these words for potency/exponent start with the letter p in French, German, and Danish, which were the languages in which Sørensen published.

'''Title Text: Hydrogen Denier'''

In the title text, Randall claims to be an H+ denier by refusing to consider loose protons to be hydrogen atoms, and as such, the “p” stands for pretend. Part of the joke is Randall's implication that this is a well-known conspiracy theory that he personally buys into (it isn't). The word "denier" is often used as shorthand for other conspiracy theories, such as a "climate change denier" or a "moon landing denier."

Here's a breakdown of this joke:

* H+ is the chemical symbol for a positively-charged atom of hydrogen, the smallest atom on the Periodic Table. Since hydrogen is normally just one proton and one electron, when you take the electron away, you make it positively charged (the + sign in the superscript) and you effecitvely end up with just a single loose proton. So the shorthand for "loose proton" is to refer to it as an H+ ion.

* pH is taught in high school science class to essentially measure the concentration of extra loose protons in, say, an aquarium. (Different fish prefer slightly different pH levels/alkilinity.) As mentioned earlier, you can interpret the term "pH" to be referring to the "p" of "H" -- the power/potency of H+ ions.

(Note that in reality, lone H+ ions do not exist in water, and instead they glom onto H2O molecules to form H3O+ and H5O2+/(H2O--H--OH2)+. If you don't know what these chemical symbols mean, don't worry about it.)

But as an H+ denier, Randall doesn't consider loose protons to be hydrogen atoms. He has a purist's view of hydrogen, that it is just "pretending" to be hydrogen as soon as it loses an electron. As a denier, he interprets the term "pH" as referring to the concentration of "pretend Hyodrgen."

==Transcript==
:[Hairbun stands behind a lectern on a podium speaking into a microphone on the lectern. A Cueball like guy stands to the left and another Cueball like guy and Megan stand to the right. There is a large sign hanging in the background along with some ornaments.]
:Sign: Grand Opening
:Hairbun: Our lab will be working on chemistry's top unsolved problems: arbitrary enzyme design, protein folding, depolymerization, and, of course, the biggest one of all:
:Hairbun: ''Figuring out what the "p" in "pH" stands for.''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Chemistry]]

940: Oversight

2024-03-02T18:30:08Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Added link to Washington Post article on whether sex counts as exercise

{{comic
| number = 940
| date = August 19, 2011
| title = Oversight
| image = oversight.png
| titletext = I felt so clever when I found a way to game the Fitocracy system by incorporating a set of easy but high-scoring activities into my regular schedule. Took me a bit to realize I'd been tricked into setting up a daily exercise routine.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Fitocracy}} is a web site that turns workouts into a social game by awarding points, badges, levels and all sorts of other {{w|Gamification|gamification}}. [[Megan]] and [[Cueball]], by their judgment, have spent approximately two hours engaged in {{w|sexual activity}}. However, according to this cartoon, Fitocracy does not consider sex to be an activity acceptable for its site, despite the vigorous nature of Cueball and Megan's sexual workout. This could be due to an [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/oversight oversight] (an unintentional error), as the comic is titled, or intentional, as Fitocracy does not consider sex to be an acceptable exercise.

The title text explains how sites like Fitocracy are so successful. Because human brains, especially the cynical ones, like to game the system whenever they can, they will find easy things to do that also score high. In the case of Fitocracy, these are simple exercises that add up a lot when applied daily. But the creators of Fitocracy (and other such successful sites, like Weight Watchers or Lumosity) know this, and, as {{w|Russian reversal|"in Soviet Russia"}}, the system games you, as shown, to adopt an exercise regimen, or to lose weight, or to get smarter, or whatever else there is.

Sex does raise your breathing rate and heartbeat, but as {{w|sparkpeople}} (a similar site to fitocracy) [http://www.sparkpeople.com/blog/blog.asp?post=you_asked_does_sex_count_as_cardio_how_many_calories_does_it_burn notes], it is not as effective as a session at a gym, as it does not typically use the main muscle groups in their full range of motion and doesn't sustain a raised heartbeat for a sufficient length of time. They consider sex to be less effective as {{w|Cardiovascular fitness|cardio}} than brisk walking, as it burns only about 100-200 cal per hour, which is little raised above a typical resting rate of about 60 cal per hour.[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2023/02/15/sex-exercise-calories-heart/] (Of course, these statistics exclude several of the sexual activities Megan and Cueball engage in.)

==Transcript==
:[Megan and Cueball have sex up against a wall.]

:[Megan and Cueball have sex standing in an armchair.]

:[Megan and Cueball have sex in a swing, swaying above a table with a flower vase on it.]

:[Fitocracy. The search phrase is "sex" and the site returned "activity not found."]

:[Megan and Cueball stand in front of the computer, Megan is at the keyboard, Cueball stands back wearing a towel tied around his waist.]
:Megan: Come on! That was like two hours of cardio!
:Cueball: Hmm, let's see... The part on the dresser was ''kind'' of like skiing...

==Trivia==
*Note that the xkcd image server accidentally briefly published [[Five-Minute Comics: Part 4]] instead of this comic, which was then cached by an xkcd browser, and later added to this site and explained.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Internet]]

Talk:2844: Black Holes vs Regular Holes

2023-10-21T00:32:41Z

Matchups: Songs about holes

FIRST! hehehe [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]] ([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk]]) 17:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 
Alright, working on transcript now. [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]] ([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk]]) 17:08, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
: Done! [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]] ([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk]]) 17:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
:: Transcripts should really not be markup-tables, ideally. I know some (that describe tables) are, but you really need to set it all out in 'Transcript markup', such as:
:: [A table with three columns, the column headers are:] ... ... ...
:: [Row:] ...thing which the row says... [Black hole:] ...foo... [Normal hole:] ...bar...
:: ...etc
:: You need to think about how a screen-reader might interact with this text. Not all can 'deconstruct' an HTML table and make as much sense as a good description.
:: Although kudos for you for typing the text in, which the rest of the description should at least pad out fairly easily. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.131|172.69.79.131]] 18:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Also got some of the explanation in, but i don't know too much. if anyone can improve on it please go ahead [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]] ([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk]]) 17:33, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

[[User:DougM|DougM]] ([[User talk:DougM|talk]]) 18:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC) I think I disagree with his assessment that regular holes are not a result of the big bang. Convince me regular holes would exist without it?

The LHC caused a regular hole by being built deep in the ground. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.200.142|172.70.200.142]] 18:08, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

"Regular" holes? Like square? Or perhaps strictly periodic in nature? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.131|172.69.79.131]] 18:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Everyone knows that SERN used the LHC to create Kerr black holes to make jelly. Randall must be an agent of the Organization if he's trying to hide it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.132|172.70.90.132]] 18:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

"Fatal to get a big one in your body"? Even medium-sized black hole is significanly bigger than human body, how would it fit inside? That said, being even just near any black hole is fatal: if it's not big enough to eat you, it's small enough to release dangerous amount of radiation. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:20, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

:Not necessarily if it's small enough. We don't know what would happen to a black hole of Planck mass. If it's stable, then it wouldn't really affect you, because it would be unable to radiate and also unable to accrete matter gravitationally. It would orbit the Earth as a WIMP doing practically nothing. Even if it's unstable and evaporates while releasing a colossal amount of energy (about 1.2 × 10¹⁶ TeV), it might not be a problem, because the particles might be moving too fast to transfer any meaningful amount of energy to your body. They would basically just pass right out of you with no effect. But of course we don't really know. [[User:EebstertheGreat|EebstertheGreat]] ([[User talk:EebstertheGreat|talk]]) 21:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I would have liked to see a row: There are songs about them: Yes (e.g., Spaghettification by Christine Lavin) and Yes (e.g., Sea of Holes by the Beatles) [[User:Matchups|Matchups]] ([[User talk:Matchups|talk]]) 00:32, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

2827: Brassica

2023-09-12T00:12:18Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Capitalize Wikipedia

{{comic
| number = 2827
| date = September 11, 2023
| title = Brassica
| image = brassica_2x.png
| imagesize = 327x319px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Sequoia Brussels sprouts are delicious but it's pretty hard to finish one.
}}

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

{{w|Brassica oleracea}} is a plant species, to which many vegetables that we eat belong. These vegetables look strikingly different from each other; compare, for example, {{w|cabbage}}, {{w|broccoli}}, {{w|kale}} and {{w|Brussels sprouts}}. There are 24 listed on Wikipedia that all look different. These different cultivars all originated from wild cabbage, having evolved into several different forms via (primarily) human selection.

Here we see someone (presumably a botanist) point out that the "Mighty Redwood" (presumably the Coast Redwood, {{w|Sequoiadendron sempervirens}}) also belongs to this species. Since the Coast Redwood is a {{w|conifer}}, while B. oleracea is a {{w|Flowering plant}}, the two species are about as different, in classification as well as what they look like, as it is possible to get without leaving the land plant lineage. If the presumed botanist can get away with this, dey can probably get away with just about anything. The caption suggests that botanists, perhaps including the tour guide in the cartoon, attempt this from time to time.

The title text refers to Sequoia Brussels sprouts. The reference is probably to the Giant Sequoia, ({{w|Sequoiadendron giganteum}}), a close relative of the Coast Redwood. "Resinous" is probably a more apt adjective than "delicious", and they're probably woody.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:: [Cueball, Megan and another Cueball are standing in front of a large tree. It is about six meters in diameter and about the bottom eight to ten meters are visible.]
:: Cueball: Did you know the Mighty Redwood is actually the same species as broccoli and kale? It's just a different cultivar.
:: Another Cueball: Wow!

:: [Caption below the panel]
:: Every year or two, botanists add another plant to Brassica oleracea and see if anyone calls them on it.

{{comic discussion}}

2827: Brassica

2023-09-12T00:11:22Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ Provided approximate visible dimensions of tree and removed mention of the type of tree, which is only inferrable from the dialogue.

{{comic
| number = 2827
| date = September 11, 2023
| title = Brassica
| image = brassica_2x.png
| imagesize = 327x319px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Sequoia Brussels sprouts are delicious but it's pretty hard to finish one.
}}

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

{{w|Brassica oleracea}} is a plant species, to which many vegetables that we eat belong. These vegetables look strikingly different from each other; compare, for example, {{w|cabbage}}, {{w|broccoli}}, {{w|kale}} and {{w|Brussels sprouts}}. There are 24 listed on wikipedia that all look different. These different cultivars all originated from wild cabbage, having evolved into several different forms via (primarily) human selection.

Here we see someone (presumably a botanist) point out that the "Mighty Redwood" (presumably the Coast Redwood, {{w|Sequoiadendron sempervirens}}) also belongs to this species. Since the Coast Redwood is a {{w|conifer}}, while B. oleracea is a {{w|Flowering plant}}, the two species are about as different, in classification as well as what they look like, as it is possible to get without leaving the land plant lineage. If the presumed botanist can get away with this, dey can probably get away with just about anything. The caption suggests that botanists, perhaps including the tour guide in the cartoon, attempt this from time to time.

The title text refers to Sequoia Brussels sprouts. The reference is probably to the Giant Sequoia, ({{w|Sequoiadendron giganteum}}), a close relative of the Coast Redwood. "Resinous" is probably a more apt adjective than "delicious", and they're probably woody.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:: [Cueball, Megan and another Cueball are standing in front of a large tree. It is about six meters in diameter and about the bottom eight to ten meters are visible.]
:: Cueball: Did you know the Mighty Redwood is actually the same species as broccoli and kale? It's just a different cultivar.
:: Another Cueball: Wow!

:: [Caption below the panel]
:: Every year or two, botanists add another plant to Brassica oleracea and see if anyone calls them on it.

{{comic discussion}}

2826: Gold

2023-09-09T02:56:03Z

Matchups: Fix spelling of "its," wikilink neutron star

{{comic
| number = 2826
| date = September 8, 2023
| title = Gold
| image = gold_2x.png
| imagesize = 695x272px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = It can be expensive to hire a professional spectroscopist for your wedding, but the quality of the spectra you get is worth it.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a single married neutron stars! Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The comic depicts an often unheard explanation of why gold is a common wedding ring material; that humans chose it due to its symbolism in reference to its creation. Gold, as the comic states, is most commonly created in the merge of {{w|neutron star}}s; something which could be seen as a "marriage". However, it's likely that the original use of gold in wedding rings was before the discovery of how it was created {{citation needed}}, thus creating the joke of the comic.

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

:[Cueball holding sparkling (likely gold) (also likely wedding) ring]
:Cueball: It kinda makes sense that we use gold for wedding rings.

:[Frame shifts to Cueball's head]
:Cueball: Because a lot of the universe's gold was probably produced by R-process nucleosynthesis when pairs of neutron stars spiraled together and merged.
:Cueball: So gold exists because two neutron stars got married.

:[Ponytail walks in from side towards Cueball]
:Ponytail: "Binary neutron star merger" would be a fun wedding theme.

:Cueball: Everyone has to try '''not''' to catch the relativistically-ejected bouquet.

{{comic discussion}}

2818: Circuit Symbols

2023-08-23T17:48:51Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ wikilink Nat H, change Hester to "protagonist" (not really a heroine), and fix typo.

{{comic
| number = 2818
| date = August 21, 2023
| title = Circuit Symbols
| image = circuit_symbols_2x.png
| imagesize = 438x362px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = A circle with an A in it means that the circuit has committed a sin and has been marked as punishment.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a LOT of trolley problems in between overpasses built on top of pogo sticks, experiencing a couple of earthquakes. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic contains several symbols used in circuit diagrams. Each is labeled with a larger object that the symbol looks like a drawing of, rather than the electrical component it actually represents. Randall has previously depicted distorted uses, depictions, and labelling of the standard US-form {{w|electronic symbol}}s in comics such as [[730: Circuit Diagram]].

{| class="wikitable"
! Symbol !! Randall's Description !! Explanation
|-
| {{w|Switch}}
| {{w|Drawbridge}}
| The symbol represents a physical on/off {{w|switch}} in a circuit, but also resembles a {{w|drawbridge}}. A switch functions the exact same as a drawbridge, impeding electrons' flow when it is open.
|-
| {{w|Capacitor}}
| {{w|Overpass}}
| A {{w|capacitor}} is a component that can be used to hold electric charge, but also looks a bit like a map depiction for a highway {{w|overpass}} of a main road passing over a more minor track. This may actually be referred to more as an {{w|Tunnel#Underpass|underpass}}, from the perspective of the lesser route, being not usually as obvious a feature when using the upper highway.
|-
| {{w|Ground (electricity)|Ground}}
| {{w|Pogo Stick}}
| This symbol represents a connection to "{{w|Ground (electricity)|ground}}" or "earth", the common baseline voltage ''or'' safe current sink for various circuits (e.g. against which an aerial signal can be compared). If the horizontal lines are taken as motion lines or a spring, it might looks like a stylised {{w|pogo stick}}.
|-
| {{w|Resistor}} (ANSI)
| {{w|Earthquake}}
| A {{w|resistor}} is a component that reduces current flow in a circuit. There are two main symbols used: an IEC-style 'box' or, like here, the ANSI zig-zagged line. In this case, it also looks somewhat like the marks an earthquake makes on a seismograph and/or the 'rucks' of the ground (especially asphalt roads) that might result from underlying tectonic movements.
|-
| {{w|Inductor}}
| {{w|Sheep}}
| {{w|Inductor}}s create a magnetic field when current passes through them, and generally consist of a coil of wire, which the symbol reflects. The symbol seems in this case to be interpreted like the fluffy wool of a sheep.
|-
| {{w|Transformer}}
| Two sheep in love, trapped on opposite side of a fence.
| A {{w|transformer}} consists of two (or more) induction coils, for input and output(s), and a common core to mediate the transfer of power across the gap. The curly loop symbols of the symbol have already been claimed to resemble sheep, and the straight line (which is the core) now represents a fence separating two sheep who nonetheless wish to be together.
|-
| {{w|Electric battery|Battery}}
| Battery
| Not a joke, this is a typical symbol for a {{w|Electric battery|battery}}, or other form of {{w|voltaic pile}}.
|-
| Battery (sorted)
| Baertty
| Randall may have mapped the characters "tt" to the first short line and "er" to the following long line in the original symbol, having had "ba" and "y" assigned to the long and short "T" shapes that form the connections to the rest of the circuit. Rearranging the symbolic verticals as long-long-short-short, as he has done in this (fictional) symbol, thus puts "er" in front of "tt".
|-
| Battery, with far too many short lines
| Battttttttttttery
| The only other fictional symbol. Which, by the same established naming rules, means that the name is spelled with six "tt"s instead of just the single pair.
|-
| {{w|Photodiode}}
| Check out this really cool diode
| A {{w|photodiode}} generates, or allows to pass, a current in response to light. The symbol is related to the standard {{w|diode}} with the arrows pointing at it representing the light which activates its behaviour. In this case, Randall instead pretends that the arrows are pointing at it to draw attention to it because it's "really cool".
|-
| {{w|Electronic oscillator|Oscillator}}
| {{w|Wave Pool}}
| An {{w|Electronic oscillator|oscillator}} generates signals that oscillate at a given frequencies, for use in other circuitry, and one symbol used for one (in reality, built from a number of components in their own right) is this symbol. Waves in water are a type of oscillation that may be more familiar to most people than waves of electricity. A {{w|wave pool}} is in fact the ''result'' of a type of (mechanical) oscillator, and rarely has electricity running through it.{{Citation needed}}
|-
| {{w|Transistor}}
| Trolley Problem
| A {{w|transistor}} will switch on current flow across one pair of connections, depending upon the input from an input one. Thus, it switches electricity in the same way that the {{w|trolley problem}} switches the trolley track. The symbol also somewhat resembles the usual pictorial depiction of the problem.
|-
| {{w|Ammeter|A circle with an A}} [In the title text]
| The circuit has committed a sin and has been marked as punishment
| Circles with letters are usually some special components, as also with the oscillator's glyph. In this case the "A" stands for ammeter, a device used to measure {{w|electric current}} (an "{{w|ampere}} meter"). This is conflated with the practice of branding the 'guilty', or requiring them to display their crime for a period of penance. For example: in ''{{w|The Scarlet Letter}}'', a historical novel by {{w|Nathaniel Hawthorne}}, the protagonist must wear an ''A'' to mark her as an adulteress.
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[A chart of various circuit symbols and their (mostly) fictitious meanings based off of their drawings, captioned:] Circuit Symbols
:[Symbol for a switch, labelled:] Drawbridge
:[Symbol for a capacitor, labelled:] Overpass
:[Symbol for a connection to ground, labelled:] Pogo Stick
:[Symbol for a resistor, labelled:] Earthquake
:[Symbol for an inductor, labelled:] Sheep
:[Symbol for a transformer, labelled:] Two Sheep in Love, Trapped on Opposite Sides of a Fence
:[Symbol for a battery, labelled:] Battery
:[Symbol for a battery, sorted, labelled:] Baertty
:[Symbol for a battery, with far too many short lines, labelled:] Battttttttttttery
:[Symbol for a photodiode, labelled:] Check Out This Really Cool Diode
:[Symbol for an oscillator, labelled:] Wave Pool
:[Symbol for a transistor, labelled:] Trolley Problem

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Engineering]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Animals]]

2801: Contact Merge

2023-07-17T19:41:31Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Correct spelling of "ellipsis"

{{comic
| number = 2801
| date = July 12, 2023
| title = Contact Merge
| image = contact_merge_2x.png
| imagesize = 353x429px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I actually kind of feel like John and Surf King wouldn't like each other, which is a lot to unpack.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by YOUR OTHER FRIEND WHO EDITS EXPLAINXKCD - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Cueball]] is in contact with someone in a some typical text-chat context, who uses the nickname of "Surf King". His phone also knows of a person called John, which seems to be the real name of the same person, although Cueball appears to have been unaware or forgetful of that fact. The humor arises when Cueball mentions this to "Surf King", who is flabbergasted that Cueball is not aware of this fact.

Some algorithm that manages the contact-list has been offering (or trying) to merge the contact details into a single entry, as having the same core details, which intrigues Cueball but without him understanding why. Instead he directs a comment about this to "@Surf King", who apparently did not deign to respond (a typed-out ellipsis as a common shorthand for being rendered speechless, as opposed to the temporary "Currently typing" ellipsis).

Cueball's follow-up comment is clearly prompted by the realisation that his 'two' contacts both share an interest in surfing, perhaps having been in separate group conversations with both John and Surf King personae in the interim, and he decides to revisit the issue. But from Surf King's response it looks like he and Surf King have been chatting (indeed, in this specific chatroom) for several years, making it mildly impressive that Cueball apparently never made the connection between his identities in that time.

The title text implies that Cueball has had second thoughts about the compatibility of Surf King/John with himself, having picked up further cues from either or both of subsequent chats with him (outside of this particular channel) that reduce the perceived social compatibility. This could be explained by John being far more (or differently) extrovert when interacting via his more sporty pseudonym, or else by having subtly changed attitudes and interests over time while not actually using one or other identity to update others' impressions of him. Either of these can be due to his perhaps having let the Surf King account of his youth go mostly idle, instead interacting primarily by his given name to be taken more seriously in professional contexts. Alternatively, it might be explained by Cueball (in his mistaken understanding of John's identity) getting a clearer view of how John dislikes himself than someone who knows they are the same person might.

It's also possible that Cueball, [[1674: Adult|being Cueball]], this (whatever it might ''actually'' be) might have gone completely over his head, with him not picking up on John's implication that he ''is'' Surf King, and the title text is yet another message sent to John.

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

:[Cueball is holding a phone and chatting in DMs]
:Cueball: @Surf King Weird, my phone keeps trying to merge your contact with John's
:Surf King: ...
:Cueball: Hey, you two should meet up-He's into surfing too
:Surf King: Oh my God
:Surf King: Are you serious
:Surf King: You've been in this chat with me for '''four years!'''

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I wonder who holds the record for accidentally doing this the longest.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Phones]]
[[Category:Social interactions]]

2624: Voyager Wires

2022-05-26T00:42:32Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Added actual information about copper prices

{{comic
| number = 2624
| date = May 25, 2022
| title = Voyager Wires
| image = voyager_wires.png
| titletext = Also, they're getting increasingly worried that someone will accidentally hit the 'retract' button, and that the end of the cable thrashing around as it winds up could devastate the Earth's surface.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a WIRE CUT BECAUSE OF BUDG- are you there houston? it's me v----ger, you'll never guess what I found! Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic claims that the {{w|Voyager program|Voyager probe}}s communicate with NASA though ridiculously long copper wires, when in reality they use radio waves.[https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status/] These wires would have to be continuously lengthened as the probes travel away from Earth. Supposedly, because of "high copper prices and budget constraints," they may not be able to afford to lengthen the wires much longer. If this occurred, they would have to either cut the wires or let them break, which would prevent any further communication with the probes. As mentioned earlier, however, they actually use radio waves, not long copper wires, so this will not actually happen.

If copper wires were dragged by the Voyager probes, 550 tons of copper would be needed per hour if the cable was 1mm² thick and it would add 1 million Ohm per hour to the cable resistance. At [https://www.moneymetals.com/copper-prices $8,560/ton], this would be $41 billion dollars/year, nearly twice [https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/nasas-fy-2022-budget NASA's entire annual budget].

The resulting wire would slow down the probes by drag, but be perfect space elevators for lightweight spacecraft.
Of course, since the Earth spins, the wires would also spool around the Earth, slowing the probes down even further. Clearly, this is not a good idea.{{citation needed}}

This doesn't even factor in how the Earth, in its rotation around the sun, will drag these copper wires in a circular orbit leading the wires through the sun at least once per year. The difference between the melting point of copper and the average core temperature of the sun has not yet been established by reproducible experiment, but is believed to be incompatible with the high quality required for signal transmission.

The consequence of a cable between a craft in space and a planetary location being suddenly retracted was recently demonstrated in the first episode of the Apple TV+ series ''{{w|Foundation (TV series)|Foundation}}'', wherein a {{w|space elevator}} tether was severed. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huRmvG3zRpg It didn't end well for anyone other than the terrorists] who won the freedom of thousands of inhabited worlds which had formerly suffered under the jackbooted oppression of {{w|Trantor}}'s fascist galactic Empire regime.

A few days before this comic was released, [https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/news/details.php?article_id=124 NASA had reported] receiving corrupted position data from the Voyager 1 probe.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
[There is an image of a space probe, presumably one of NASA's Voyager probes, with a long wire connecting it to the earth. To the left, there is a second wire, which goes offscreen. Below, there is a caption.]

:[Caption below the panel]:
:Sad news: Due to high copper prices and budget constraints, NASA may finally have to cut the wires that they've been spooling out to communicate with Voyager 1 and 2.
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Space probes]]

2589: Outlet Denier

2022-03-06T19:00:20Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ fxi typo

{{comic
| number = 2589
| date = March 4, 2022
| title = Outlet Denier
| image = outlet_denier.png
| titletext = There are regularly placed bumps on the underside just the right size to press the rocker switch on the power strip.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BIG CHUNGUS - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This is the fifth installment in the series of [[:Category:Cursed Connectors|Cursed Connectors]] and presents Cursed Connectors #78: The Outlet Denier. It follows [[2507: USV-C]] (#280), but more than half a year has passed since the last comic with one of these connectors.

The Outlet Denier connector in this comic is the large one to the right. It has a plug on the downward side that is supposed to go into the {{w|power strip}} on the left. The power bar is of the type with a {{w|Light_switch#Rocker|rocker switch}} that can turn the entire power bar off. This power bar has five outlets. But no matter which of those five the outlets are chosen for the Outlet Denier, the bar will cover all the other four, hence the name, and also why it is cursed. Also there is a bar from the center towards right, and a D shaped bar to the left. If the power strips sockets were turned 90 degrees, those sections would probably block most of the other sockets as well.

Many appliances require transformers or other large components on their power cord. Sometimes these "power bricks" are built around the plug, and these may block access to other sockets on a power strip or wall outlet. Other plugs are deliberately designed to block the other half of a duplex outlet, preventing users from plugging anything else in that could overload the circuit. The comic depicts an extreme case of a cumbersome connector shape designed to block an entire power strip. Worse, the extreme length could prevent it from being plugged into a wall outlet too close to the floor, forcing the user to use up a power strip for it.

The title text says that the Outlet Denier has bumps on the underside of the long bar that would match up with the location of the rocker switch no matter which outlet of the strip it is plugged into. It's not clear whether this will turn the power switch off or force it always on. But either way, it gets in the way of the user being able to control the power themselves.

If it forces it off, then the Outlet Denier cannot even be used. So to at least assume someone might actually use it, it must force it on. Since there are nothing else that can go into the power strip, it is not that important it it is possible to switch it off though.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Please help with better English description of the parts. I lack the right words.}}
:[To the left is a power strip with a rocker switch at the top and five outlets. A wire goes from the top to the left. To the right is the connector that should go into one of the outlets. A curbed wire comes from the right into the end of the connector, which is a bit long and has the legs under neath where it ends. But instead of ending there, there is a bar orthogonal to the first part, which is at least four times as long as the normal part. And a D shaped bar going out from this long bar from one to the other side of the part with the legs. If it is plugged in, the long bar will cover all the other outlet of the power strip. Above is a title and below is a label.]
:Cursed Connectors #78
:The outlet denier

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category: Cursed Connectors]]

2549: Edge Cake

2021-12-04T13:34:22Z

Matchups: /* Trivia */ Correct spelling of Emily Dickinson (by a fellow Amherstite) and add link

{{comic
| number = 2549
| date = December 1, 2021
| title = Edge Cake
| image = edge_cake.png
| titletext = Every time IERS adds or removes a leap second, they send me a birthday cake out of superstition.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by FRINGE FRUITCAKE – Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Megan]]—possibly an {{w|IERS}} (International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems) agent—wishes Emily, represented as [[Hairbun]], Happy Birthday. This prompts a confused [[Cueball]] to ask if her birthday was sometime last month. Emily explains that she was born over the North Pole in a plane, meaning that she was born in every timezone at once. Technically though this is false, as there are some timezones (such as {{w|Nepal Standard Time|UTC+5:45}}) that are not represented at the north pole. Except for the one hour before it's midnight at the International Date Line, the date in eastern time zones is one day ahead of western time zones, so Emily would have been born on two days at once. However, since the concept of time zones is thus irrelevant, researchers in the Arctic at or near the North Pole use {{w|Coordinated Universal Time}} as the [http://www.thoughtco.com/the-north-pole-1435098 local time standard] by convention. Thus it could have been said that Emily was born on the date that it was at that time in UTC.

Furthermore, it is extremely unlikely that she would have been born at the exact instant the plane was over the north pole, indeed, it is unlikely that the plane even traveled over the exact pole, as opposed to a few miles or even feet to either side of it. With modern positioning equipment such as GPS it should have been possible to determine which time zone the plane was in when she was born. Even in the impossibly unlikely event that she was directly above the pole at the instant of her birth, at jetliner speeds the plane was travelling about ten miles per minute, so a reasonable delay of even seconds in declaring "time of birth" would have placed the plane and her clearly in one time zone.

She also says that it was February 29th (presumably it was also February 28 or March 1 in some time zones). February 29th only happens at most once every four years in the Gregorian calendar, adding to the confusion - people born on February 29th often celebrate their non-leap-year birthdays on arbitrary days (or {{w|The_Pirates_of_Penzance#Synopsis|not at all}}). Normally {{w|Birth aboard aircraft and ships|one could simply use the time zone of the city the airplane took off from}}, but the airline company was changing ownership from one country to another at the time, so this option has apparently been ruled out. This is not terribly logical however, since contracts transferring ownership usually specify an exact time (commonly one minute before or after midnight in a specific time zone to avoid confusion on which day midnight is in) to come into effect. Regardless of which time zone(s) she was in when she was born this is an absolute time and if she was born before it she would have been born in an aircraft of the first country and if after it in an aircraft of the second country. Alternately, the time zone of the city the aircraft took off from doesn't change even if nationality of the plane changes in midair, so that should have still been an option.

The punchline is that rather than try to identify the correct birthday for Emily, the {{w|BIPM}} has decided to let her have birthdays whenever she wants. This doesn't make much sense, however. As noted above even if she was born in every time zone at once it could only have been on one of two days (February 29th, plus either February 28th or March 1st). Since it is common for people born on February 29th to celebrate on February 28th in non-leap years, it would have been trivial to pick the non-leap day present in some of the time zones (either February 28th or March 1st) and declare it Emily's birthday.

Both the comic title and Cueball's final line are puns on "{{w|edge case}}", an engineering term referring to situations or conditions that are unusual in a way likely to cause problems unless specifically accounted for. Edge pieces are generally only important with sheet goods (brownies sheet cakes, etc), which are typically cut into pieces creating a difference between pieces originating on the edge and pieces originating from the center. Since the sides of a cake are often frosted, an edge piece has two faces covered in frosting and a corner piece has three, while a center piece only has one. Depending upon your relative preferences between the surface (often icing over marzipan) and core body of the cake (which can be fruitcake, or some variety of spongecake, etc, but not actually obvious which until the cake is cut), it being an edge-faced slice can be considered a bonus. Cueball certainly seems to appreciate this.

The title text states that the {{w|IERS}} sends Emily a cake every time they add or remove a leap second, out of superstition (perhaps Megan is delivering that cake). The International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service is in charge of global time standards. It occasionally adds one leap-second to {{w|Coordinated Universal Time}} to adjust for changes in the rotation speed of the Earth.

==Trivia==
Hairbun was last named "Emily" in [[788: The Carriage]]. More specifically, that version of Hairbun represented {{w|Emily Dickinson}}, a real, historical person who had no such issues regarding her birthday.{{Citation needed}}

==Transcript==
:[Megan is walking towards Cueball and Emily (who resembles Hairbun), holding a cake.]
:Megan: Happy birthday, Emily!
:Cueball: Wait, wasn't that last month? When's your birthday, anyways?
:Emily: It's complicated.

:[A diagram of a flight path over the North Pole, with meridian lines radiating out from the center. Emily's dialogue appears above the diagram, but she herself does not appear in this panel.]
:Emily: My mom went into labor on an arctic international flight that diverted directly over the North Pole.
:Emily: I was born in every time zone at once.

:[With Megan standing behind her, Emily holds out a plate of cake to Cueball.]
:Emily: It was also February 29th, and the airline was just changing ownership between countries.
:Emily: The International Bureau of Weights and Measures finally issued a declaration that it's my birthday whenever I want.
:Emily: Cake?
:Cueball: Nice, it's all edge pieces.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Time]]
[[Category:Engineering]]
[[Category:Science]]

2311: Confidence Interval

2020-05-26T11:58:41Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ spelling, punctuation, etc.

{{comic
| number = 2311
| date = May 25, 2020
| title = Confidence Interval
| image = confidence_interval.png
| titletext = The worst part is that's the millisigma interval.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TERRIBLE MODEL. Link to relevant statistical terms missing. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Graphs of continuous functions' predicted values often show confidence intervals, a region (either shaded or marked with dotted lines, the latter used here) that indicates the margin of error for the prediction at any point. The joke in this comic is that the estimate has so much uncertainty that the confidence interval extends off the top and bottom of the chart, which in a real report would usually prevent it from being printed and require a re-scaled chart to show it. Further, the title text suggests that these lines are not traditional 1 Sigma error intervals, but in fact 1/1000th of a sigma.

Furthermore, variations in the curve that are small compared to the error bar typically can't be distinguished from errors. Therefore, the shape of the curve - and the entire graph in this example - is meaningless.

==Transcript==
:[A graph is shown in the middle of the panel. There is a square frame around it. The graph has two unlabeled axes with ticks along both axes. The axes end in arrows. A solid line graph is shown. It begins around the middle of the Y axis, goes up and flattens twice before falling down towards the right. Far above and just below the frame around the graph are two gray dotted lines. They do not follow the same path as the solid line inside the frame, but do follow the same general trend. Below the graph, but inside the frame, is a caption:]
:Fig. 2: Predicted Curve

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Science tip: If your model is bad enough, the confidence intervals will fall outside the printable area.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Tips]]
[[Category:Statistics]]

2301: Turtle Sandwich Standard Model

2020-05-03T02:07:20Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Comic 474 reference

{{comic
| number = 2301
| date = May 1, 2020
| title = Turtle Sandwich Standard Model
| image = turtle_sandwich_standard_model.png
| titletext = It's possible the bread and shell can be split into a top and bottom flavor, and some models additionally suggest Strange Bread and Charm Shells.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TURTLE EATING A SANDWICH. The original explanation was obviously erroneous and needs to be replaced. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic references particle physics. The {{w|Standard Model}} of physics explains the base particles and fields that make up the universe, including the quarks, which have six flavors: up, down, top, bottom, strange, charm. While much of the theory was written earlier on, it took a long time for experiments to catch up. Hence, there were many particles that were theorized to exist, but had not yet been found, like the two unconfirmed turtle/sandwich mixes.

As parts of the standard model are still missing it is theoretically possible that the standard particle model is as wrong as the model that sandwiches and turtles are made of combinations of 4 interchangeable parts.

Comic [[474]] also puns on the flavors of quarks.

==Transcript==

:[A two-by-two grid, with a piece of bread next to the top left cell; a turtle shell next to the bottom left cell; lettuce, cheese, and tomato above the top left cell; and an turtle head enclosed in a circle above the top right cell.]

:[Top left cell: an image of a sandwich.]
✔ CONFIRMED

:[Top right cell: an image of a shell-less turtle sandwiched between two slices of bread.]
(?)

:[Bottom left cell: an image of a turtle shell housing lettuce, cheese, and tomato - the contents of a sandwich.]
(?)

:[Bottom right cell: an image of a turtle.]
✔ CONFIRMED

:[Caption below the panel]
Our lab is working to detect the two missing pieces of the turtle-sandwich standard model.

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

2286: 6-Foot Zone

2020-03-29T14:13:26Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Link to USFS Equestrian Design Guidebook; note that the Covid series is not consecutive.

{{comic
| number = 2286
| date = March 27, 2020
| title = 6-Foot Zone
| image = 6_foot_zone.png
| titletext = Technically now it's a 34-foot zone.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by the 8 social-distancing horses, who are not themselves socially distancing. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is the 11th comic of the last 12 ([[2283: Exa-Exabyte]] was unrelated) in a [[:Category:COVID-19|series of comics]] related to the {{w|2019–20 coronavirus pandemic|2020 pandemic}} of the {{w|coronavirus}} - {{w|SARS-CoV-2}}.

This comic is about {{w|social distancing}}, a common practice to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 disease. It has been suggested to maintain 6 feet (i.e. 1.83 m - in e.g. France and Britain the suggested distance is 2 m) of distance between yourself and other people, to prevent the transmission of respiratory droplets from you to others (or vice versa).

[[Randall]] takes this 6 feet of distance, and does calculations of the "area" of distancing, "border", population density, and "real estate value". He finally culminates in determining the number of horses that could also fit in the space.

Randall's border length and approximate area calculations are based on a zone with an outside radius of approximately 6.8 feet or 82 inches (2.07 m), meaning that the person has a radius of approximately 0.8 feet (9.6 in, 0.24 m). That is, 2π(6.8ft) = 42.7 ft and π-1(6.8ft)-2 = 145 ft2.

There are two different population densities that can be calculated. The one used by Randall in the comic is the population density of the exclusion zone itself, i.e. just the reciprocal of its area. This is π-1(6.8 ft)-2 = 190,000 mi-2. A different density is the density of a crowd in which everyone obeys the distancing rules. That would result in 0.9069(π-1)(3.8ft)-2 = 560,000 mi-2 population density. When people stand 6ft apart from each other, their exclusion zones are overlapping; instead we can use smaller circles with 3.8 ft radius that are not overlapping. 0.9069 is the packing density of circles in the plane.
For comparison, only 21 countries have a population density >1000 mi-2, but there are {{w|List_of_cities_proper_by_population_density|a few cities}} with a population density on the same order of magnitude (~100,000 mi-2).

The ''[https://www.fs.fed.us/t-d/pubs/htmlpubs/htm07232816/toc.htm USFS Equestrian Design Guidebook]'' is a real thing.

The title text is a pun using the alternate definition of foot, noting that a human has two feet and a horse has four, so 8 × 4 + 2 = 34 feet.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:Guide to the 6 foot Social Distancing Zone
:Profile image of person with 6 foot distance measurements on both sides
:Overhead image of person within a roughly circular shape extending 6 feet in all directions from the person. The dimensions of the person account for the non-circular shape.
:Approximate area: 145 square feet
:Border length: 43 feet
:Population density: 190,000 people/square mile
:Value at NYC real estate price per square foot: $195,000
:Maximum number of horses that could fit inside it with you, estimated using the dimensions in the US Forest Service Equestrian Design Handbook: 8
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Animals]]

2283: Exa-Exabyte

2020-03-21T01:47:11Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Examples and references near 10^18

{{comic
| number = 2283
| date = March 20, 2020
| title = Exa-Exabyte
| image = exa_exabyte.png
| titletext = To picture 10^18, just picture 10^13, but then imagine you connect the left side of the 3 to close off the little bays.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by 10 EXA-EXABYTES OF APPLES. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Randall has taken a break from his [[:Category: COVID-19|COVID-19 series]].

This is a comic about the difficulty of picturing or understanding large numbers. As mentioned in the comic, an {{w|exabyte}} is 10^18 bytes, while an "exa-exabyte" -- not a real word but one that makes sense if you apply the principles of {{w|Metric prefix|metric prefixes}} -- is 10^36 bytes. 10^36 is properly given the name undecillion (in short scale, and sextillion in long scale). According to a 2015 article by ''The New York Times'', researchers estimate that there is [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/21/science/counting-all-the-dna-on-earth.html 50 trillion trillion trillion] DNA {{w|base pair}}s on Earth -- 5 * 10^37 "bytes" of data. This is a similar number to [[Miss Lenhart]]'s claim of 10 exa-exabytes -- 1 * 10^37 bytes.

These numbers are larger than most people can imagine. Even much smaller numbers such as a billion (10^9) or a trillion (10^12) are hard to imagine. For instance:
* 1 billion seconds is equal to 31.7 years; 1 trillion seconds is equal to 31,688.74 years.
* [https://medium.com/@alecmuffett/a-billion-grains-of-rice-91202220e10e 1 billion grains of rice] weighs approximately 34,447 lb (15,625 kg).

Wikipedia has an article on the {{w|exabyte}} and one on large numbers which describes [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(numbers)#1018 various things close to 10^18].
[https://abc7news.com/science/possibly-habitable-planet-found-100-light-years-away/5821548/ TOI 700 d], a potentially habitable Earth-like {{w|exoplanet}} is 100 light years away, which is about 10^18 meters.

[[Megan]] trivializes the problem away by describing an exabyte as 10 apples, with "18 smaller apples, floating next to them and a little above", representing the notation 10^18 using apples for digits. This is entirely unhelpful, as apples, whatever their position, don't represent exponents, and this causes Miss Lenhart to yell out "No!" in frustration. The title text further trivializes the problem of visualizing large numbers by suggesting that you can visualize 10^18 as a number by simply visualizing the similar-looking number of 10^13 with some extra lines drawn to turn the 3 into an 8. Changes in exponents can cause huge changes in the value shown, and this is no exception: Changing that 3 into an 8 changes the value by a factor of 100,000.

Randall has previously discussed the difficulty of large numbers in [[2091: Million, Billion, Trillion]] and [[558: 1000 Times]].

[[1605: DNA]] also discusses how "hard" biology is.

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

:[Miss Lenhart is teaching a class, and is speaking to Cueball to her left, who is sitting at a desk. She holds a pointer, and is pointing to a blackboard.]
:Miss Lenhart: Biology is hard because there's so ''much'' of it. Earth hosts about 10 exa-exabytes worth of DNA.

:[In a frameless panel, the panel has panned to the left and is now showing Miss Lenhart, Cueball sitting at a desk and Megan also sitting at a desk, behind Cueball. Miss Lenhart holds the pointer to her side.]
:Cueball: What's an exa-exabyte?
:Miss Lenhart: It's 1036 bytes.
:Cueball: How do I picture ''that''?
:Miss Lenhart: Imagine you had an exabyte of data, but each byte ''contained'' an exabyte of data.

:[Zoomed in on Cueball]
:Cueball: I can't even picture what an exabyte is.
:Miss Lenhart (off screen): It's 1018 bytes.
:Cueball: But how do I picture 1018?

:[Zoomed back out, showing Megan, Cueball, and Miss Lenhart]
:Megan: Imagine you had 10 apples.
:Megan: Now imagine 18 smaller apples, floating next to them and a little above.
:Cueball: Cool, got it.
:Miss Lenhart: ''No!''

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category: Biology]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
[[Category: Comics featuring Megan]]

833: Convincing

2020-03-10T02:27:17Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Changed "girl

{{comic
| number = 833
| date = December 13, 2010
| title = Convincing
| image = convincing.png
| titletext = And if you labeled your axes, I could tell you exactly how MUCH better.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a typical xkcd compilation. [[:Category:Romance|Relationships]], [[:Category:Math|math]], [[:Category:Charts|graphs]] and of course, the twist. At [[523: Decline]] Cueball's fascination with graphs seems to have retaliated against him. [[Cueball]] wants to get back together with [[Megan]], but she declines and shows him a graph showing why. She thinks that the downward trend of the graph will convince him that their relationship is also in decline. But, Cueball takes that as this is a woman who does not follow proper protocol, since she does not label the axes (plural for axis) on her graph. We do not even know the unit of measure on the graph, let alone what each axis corresponds to. For all we know, the horizontal axis could be labeled "Time" and the vertical axis could be labeled "Crappiness of Relationship" or "Unawesomeness of Relationship". In that case, a downward trend would be a positive thing.

In the twist, Cueball sees that he can do better than this woman and switches his position and decides he is going to break up with her.

The title text points out the irony that ''if'' the axes had been labelled, then Cueball would be able to use it to determine exactly how much better a relationship he could get, since he could read how crappy the present one is. Yet he would lose the twist at the end, so that the graph data would have to convince him and not the lack of labels.

"Someone who doesn't label her axes" sounds like an inversion of "someone who labels her exes", which is an accusation sometimes levelled in break-up situations.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Megan are talking. Megan has a board.]
:Cueball: I think we should give it another shot.
:Megan: We should break up, and I can prove it.

:[The second panel is the graph. A series of points moves steadily downward.]
:Our Relationship.

:[Cueball looks at the graph.]
:Cueball: Huh.

:Cueball: Maybe you're right.
:Megan: I knew data would convince you.
:Cueball: No, I just think I can do better than someone who doesn't label her axes.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Romance]]

2199: Cryptic Wifi Networks

2019-09-06T22:25:11Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Removed suggestion of Mt. Everest--beanie guy does not have attire or equipment for such an ascent.

{{comic
| number = 2199
| date = September 6, 2019
| title = Cryptic Wifi Networks
| image = cryptic_wifi_networks.png
| titletext = They actually showed up on the first scan by the first WiFi-capable device.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Toshiba-U2187-OfficeLink-Net46UHZ. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

There are in many places cryptic WiFi networks that pop up in strange places and often seem to come out of nowhere. In this comic, [[Randall]] is joking that those networks are an unexplained natural phenomenon (as opposed the more probable explanation that they come from strangely placed servers).

In the picture, a character with a beanie is pictured at the top of a high mountain. Checking his phone, he sees a network that can be connected to even in this remote area; the implication is that this is a natural phenomenon.

The name of the network is Toshiba-U2187-OfficeLink-Net46UHZ. {{w|Toshiba}} is a multinational conglomerate specializing in electronics; the implication here may be that Toshiba is taking credit for these networks or that it is the cause of them.

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

:[A human with a beanie and a backpack is checking his phone at the highest mountain in a mountainous landscape.]

:Phone: Available WiFi Networks
:Phone: Toshiba-U2187-OfficeLink-Net46UHZ
:Phone: [in gray] Join other network

:Text under comic: Tech Trivia: No one actually knows what devices produce those cryptic WiFi networks. They just appear at random across the Earth's surface.

{{comic discussion}}

2187: Geologic Time

2019-08-09T23:10:48Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ numerical details on magnification

{{comic
| number = 2187
| date = August 9, 2019
| title = Geologic Time
| image = geologic_time.png
| titletext = Ok, well, we'll be sure to pay you sometime soon, geologically speaking.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a GEOLOGIST PAST DEADLINE. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Analogies to explain the passage of billions of years are often used in popular science explanations, to help compress these huge spans of time into something the human mind can comprehend. The football field analogy is one of these - if you spread billions of years over a football field, each yard is tens of millions of years, and human history, which is only several thousand years old, is a tiny fraction of that.

[[Megan]], a {{w|geologist}}, used such a long story about how little the time of human history compares to the Earths total history. She does this to juxtapose it with normal human time-scales, to imply that her being two weeks late turning in her project is immaterial by the standards of the Earth's tremendous age. She tries to sell this story to [[Cueball]] and [[Hairbun]], but Hairbun's response does not seem to bode well for Megan.

Megan's delay of two weeks would map to three nanometers on the football field. The most powerful {{w|electron microscopes}} have a magnification of ten million, which would make it look like three centimeters (about an inch), so her statement about it being "too small to see even with a powerful microscope" is a bit of an exaggeration. The most powerful optical microscope has 6500x magnification,<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/science/08obscope.html New York Times, March 8, 2011]</ref> which would indeed be inadequate.

[[Randall]] states in the caption that this is a trick that geologist always tries to use when being late turning something in.

In the title text, Hairbun and Cueball reply by turning Megan's own argument against her. They promise to pay her for her work in what could be considered a short amount of time on the geological scale, which could be years, decades, or possibly longer than Megan will be alive. Megan, like all working people, wants to be paid in a timely manner for her work, and would be deeply dissatisfied to have her payment delayed for so long. Thus, Hairbun and Cueball's rebuttal proves a point: when other people require you be punctual, it's easy to dismiss them as just being impatient; when you're the one who needs other people to be punctual, it's not so easy to criticize yourself.

==Transcript==
:[Megan, arms spread out, is delivering a long-winded explanation to Hairbun and Cueball.]
:Megan: Imagine Earth's history as a football field, from the planet's formation at one end to today at the other.
:Megan: Complex life would be largely limited to the final ten yards. Dinosaurs appear at the five-yard line, the age of mammals happens in the last 1½ yards, and humans arise in the final few millimeters.
:Megan: All of written history would fit in a strip narrower than a single hair.
:Megan: "Two weeks" would be too small to see even with a powerful microscope.
:Hairbun: Mm hmm.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Geologists always try this when they're late turning something in.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Time]]

2104: Biff Tannen

2019-01-28T15:34:06Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2104
| date = January 28, 2019
| title = Biff Tannen
| image = biff_tannen.png
| titletext = I can't help myself; now I want to read a bunch of thinkpieces from newspapers in Biff's 1985 arguing over whether the growth of the region into a corporate dystopia was inevitable.
}}

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

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

[Cueball talks while walking up to White Hat, who is reading in an armchair.]

Cueball: You know, in the universe where Biff Tannen took Marty McFly's sports almanac back in time, the people wouldn't have any counterfactuals to work with.

Cueball: Their world would be ''the'' world.

[White Hat Turns to look at Cueball as he keeps talking.]

Cueball: They would have spent decades debating which structural problems enabled the rise of BiffCo, the decline of the city, and general social decay.

Cueball: Everyone would find reasons it confirmed their pet theory.

Cueball: I'm going to write a book set in that universe. I'll call it ''Hill Valley Elegy''.

[White Hat turns away in disgust.]

White Hat: ... I ''hate'' you.

{{comic discussion}}

2103: Midcontinent Rift System

2019-01-25T16:14:16Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ wedge --> crowbar; wikilink Rift; fix typo; reference for polarization

{{comic
| number = 2103
| date = January 25, 2019
| title = Midcontinent Rift System
| image = midcontinent_rift_system.png
| titletext = The best wedge issue is an actual wedge.
}}

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

Recently, USA politics has caused polarization of the public.<ref>[https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/215210/partisan-differences-growing-number-issues.aspx Partisan Differences Growing on a Number of Issues]</ref> It is said to be "split" in two camps (liberal and conservative). Here [[Black Hat]] is trying to get elected by promising he will actually split America in two. His presentation suggest he would accomplish this by using a giant crowbar, thus completing the {{w|Midcontinent Rift System|Midcontinent Rift}}.

It is unclear why would anyone vote for such a thing, but people directly affected (the Midwest) are likely to vote against [[Black Hat]].

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

:[A map of North America shows the Midcontinent Rift System as a red line curving through the Great Lakes and down through the midwestern United States.]
:1.1 billion years ago, the North American continent began to split in half.

:[Black Hat stands at a lectern with a "Vote 2020" sign on it. He gestures to an image of the globe with a giant crowbar inserted in the rift with an arrow indicating applying pressure to widen the rift.]
:Black Hat: We don't know why it stopped. If elected, I vow to finish the job. Thank youl.

:[Ponytail, Black Hat, Megan, and Cueball walk to the right away from a set of stairs. Cueball is looking at a phone and Ponytail is looking at a device or paper with writing on it.]
:Ponytail: Great job up there.
:Black Hat: Thanks! How are my polling numbers?
:Ponytail: Well, I'm seeing some weakness in the Midwest.
:Black Hat: So am I. So am I.
{{comic discussion}}

2095: Marsiforming

2019-01-07T22:02:39Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ fix caps; interstellar -> interplanetary (we're in the same star system)

{{comic
| number = 2095
| date = January 7, 2019
| title = Marsiforming
| image = marsiforming.png
| titletext = It has so many advantages--it preserves Martian life, requires fewer interplanetary launches, and makes it much easier to field-test Mars rovers.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a MARS ROVER IN MAZATLAN, MEXICO. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

{{w|Terraforming}} is the (so far only suggested) process of changing a planet, usually to make it more habitable (for humans). A very common example is {{w|Mars}}, which is known to harbour water ice and believed to have previously been warm enough to have liquid water. Normally, plans for terraforming try to adjust temperatures to be compatible with liquid water, and an atmosphere containing significant amounts of oxygen but little carbon dioxide. The word {{w|Terra}} is the Latin name for {{w|Earth}}, so Terraforming would be "Earth Forming".

In this comic [[Cueball]] is suggesting doing the opposite: terraform Earth to be more like Mars, i.e. extremely dry, cold and with a very thin atmosphere. The comic title combines Mars with Forming (with a linking "i") to create the new word Marsiforming. Understandably, he's having trouble getting the enthusiastic response to his proposal that he expects.

The title text provides examples of how this could improve things: preserving Martian life (a proposed reason to terraform Mars would be to provide a second planet to preserve Earth life at the cost of destroying any potential [undiscovered] Martian organisms, so by marsiforming Earth, we would provide a second planet to preserve hypothetical Martian life, albeit at the cost of making it uninhabitable to Humans and Earth life), fewer interplanetary launches (no need to leave this planet's atmosphere in order to visit itself, and Martians who might otherwise need to return to their home planet could instead settle on Earth), easier to field-test Mars rovers (field-test means to test in the environment of actual use, which is now readily available on Earth).

There are known extremophile species that would survive underground on Mars. If similar life is hiding on Mars, marsiforming the Earth would benefit their possible eventual interplanetary efforts. There is an existing project to begin experimental terraforming on Mars by nurturing some of our extremophile species on it.{{w|Terraforming_of_Mars#Funded_research:_ecopoiesis}}

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

[Cueball is on a stage giving a presentation, with a diagram behind him. The diagram shows Earth and Mars side-by-side.]

Cueball: Earth and Mars may look different now, but with some orbiting mirrors and atmospheric adjustments, we could change that.

[Caption below the panel:]

I'm having trouble selling people on my proposal to terraform Earth to resemble Mars.

{{comic discussion}}

2018: Wall Art

2019-01-04T19:07:21Z

Matchups: /* Trivia */ Removed (unless Randall gets extremely slow). At this point, he is not going to live long enough to get back in sync even if he were to stop drawing tomorrow.

<noinclude>:''"2018", this comic's number, redirects here. For the comic named "2018", see [[1935: 2018]].''</noinclude>
{{comic
| number = 2018
| date = July 11, 2018
| title = Wall Art
| image = wall_art.png
| titletext = At first, I moved from pokémon posters to regular oil paintings, but then these really grumpy and unreasonable detectives from the Louvre showed up and took them all. They wouldn't even give me back my thumbtacks!
}}

==Explanation==
''{{w|Pokémon}}'' is a media franchise managed by The Pokémon Company, which started with the release of the first video games, ''{{w|Pokémon Red and Blue}}'', for the {{w|Game Boy}} in 1996. Originally released in Japan as ''Pokémon Red and Green'', the game was released in North America as ''Pokémon Red and Blue'' in 1998, 20 years ago at the time of publishing.

This is another comic about getting older. Cueball mentions that he thought Pokémon posters were cool 20 years ago (when Pokémon was first released). Now that he is older, he instead has framed oil paintings, which were what wealthier older folks were displaying on their walls at the times that their teenagers were widely into Pokémon. The punchline comes when White Hat mentions that his oil paintings are just paintings of Pokémon characters, showing that Cueball hasn't completely adopted those older cultures in 20 years of maturing, but does have more money.

The title text mentions that Cueball originally had "regular" oil paintings. However, these appear to have been ''stolen from the {{w|Louvre}}'', a famous art museum in Paris, which houses the {{w|Mona Lisa}}. Thus the "grumpy and unreasonable" detectives which came to retrieve the paintings. It even suggests that Cueball had attached those valuable and expensive oil paintings on his wall by poking through them with thumbtacks.

The comic repeats a common theme of poking fun at how nerds tend to not fully "get" the culture surrounding them, adopting parts but remaining completely blind to other parts. Sharing and reading jokes about this may help people who experience that pattern handle the stress of being unable to completely conform, by bonding over the commonality.

==Transcript==
:[White Hat and Cueball are standing together and looking at eleven framed pictures on a wall.]
:Cueball: Getting older is so weird. 20 years ago, I thought thumbtacked Pokémon posters made my wall look so cool.

:[Cueball has his hands raised up in a close-up.]
:Cueball: But these days I feel this compulsion to get framed oil paintings and spend hours carefully arranging them.

:[Return to the setting in the first frame.]
:White Hat: These are all oil paintings of Pokémon.
:Cueball: Look, I’m meeting maturity halfway.

==Trivia==
This is the only xkcd comic ever where the year when the comic was published, in the Gregorian calendar, is the same as the comic's number. This comic is numbered 2018 and was published on Wednesday, July 11, 2018.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Pokémon]]

2084: FDR

2018-12-12T15:39:15Z

Matchups: Fix typos; note Randall's dating error.

{{comic
| number = 2084
| date = December 12, 2018
| title = FDR
| image = fdr.png
| titletext = June 21st, 365, the date of the big Mediterranean earthquake and tsunami, lived in infamy for a few centuries before fading. Maybe the trick is a catchy rhyme; the '5th of November' thing is still going strong over 400 years later.
}}

==Explanation==

The United States Naval base at Pearl Harbor was [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor attacked in 1941], and is credited with starting the United States' involvement in World War II. The then US president, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt Franklin D. Roosevelt], issued a speech to the American people which begins with the line "December 7th, 1941. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infamy_Speech A date which will live in infamy...]". Whenever Randall writes "December" he feels compelled to complete the line, a mistake which is visible in this comic.

The title text refers to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/365_Crete_earthquake 365 Crete earthquake], a historical earthquake with a magnitude of at least 8.0 which caused widespread destruction across the Eastern Mediterranean; and to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes_Night Guy Fawkes Night], the anniversary of the famous failed attempt to bomb Parliament on the night of November 5th, 1605. The later event is immortalized in the rhyme "remember remember, the fifth of November, the gunpowder, treason, and plot", the former event less so--indeed, Randall (intentionally?) gets the date wrong; the quake was actually in July.

==Transcript==
:[Close-up of a form]
:[Name:] Randall Munroe
:Date: Dec <s>7, 19–</s> 12, 2018
:Country: United States

:[Caption below the frame:]
:FDR was so good at speeches that I spend a whole month each year writing the date wrong.

{{comic discussion}}

2083: Laptop Issues

2018-12-10T17:00:19Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ Last panel

{{comic
| number = 2083
| date = December 10, 2018
| title = Laptop Issues
| image = laptop_issues.png
| titletext = Hang on, we got a call from the feds. They say we can do whatever with him, but the EPA doesn't want that laptop in the ocean. They're sending a team.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT WITH INEXPLICABLE TECH PROBLEMS. Horribly incomplete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball goes to tech support with his laptop, explaining all his arcane problems.

{|class="wikitable"
| ''My laptop's battery won't hold a charge.''
| A common problem...
|-
| ''Tried that. Now the new ones won't either.''
| This could be an issue with the laptop's battery management hardware.
|-
| ''Also, random files get corrupted on the first of every month. Factory reset didn't help either.''
| Some devices may be scheduled to do a "disk cleanup" on the first of every month. Somehow, this task is corrupting files that should be kept.
|-
| ''When it's plugged in, I get static from my plumbing.''
| TODO
|-
| ''And it reboots if someone uses an arc welder nearby''
| TODO
|-
| ''Transition(R) lenses go dark when exposed to the screen''
| The screen would have to emit UV rays
|-
| ''...and when I open too many tabs, it fogs any nearby photographic film.''
| The screen would have to emitting X-rays that can pass through the film's container and expose the film
|}

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

:[Cueball is walking past a sign reading "Tech Support," with a right-pointing arrow and carrying a laptop.]
:Off panel voice #1: Oh, No.
:Off panel voice #2: What?
:Off panel voice #1: This guy. He has the worst tech problems.

:[Cueball at tech support desk with closed laptop on desk. Short-hair guy and Ponytail are there.]
:Cueball: My laptop's battery won't hold a charge.
:Short-hair guy: We can replace it.
:Cueball: Tried that. Now the new ones won't either.

:[Close-up of Cueball]
:Cueball: Also, random files get corrupted on the first day of every month. Factory reset didn't help.
:Off panel voice #2: You weren't kidding.

:[Close-up of Cueball]
:Cueball: When it's plugged in, I get static shocks from my plumbing.
:Off panel voice: What the...
:Cueball: And it reboots if someone uses an arc welder nearby.

:[Same tableau as second panel except that the laptop is slightly open now.]
:Cueball: Transitions® lenses go dark when exposed to the screen, and when I open too many tabs, it fogs nearby photographic film.
:Short-hair guy: We don't usually do this, but I've gotten permission from my manager to have you and the laptop hurled into the ocean.
:Cueball: That's probably for the best.

{{comic discussion}}

2083: Laptop Issues

2018-12-10T16:57:15Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ third and fourth panels

{{comic
| number = 2083
| date = December 10, 2018
| title = Laptop Issues
| image = laptop_issues.png
| titletext = Hang on, we got a call from the feds. They say we can do whatever with him, but the EPA doesn't want that laptop in the ocean. They're sending a team.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT WITH INEXPLICABLE TECH PROBLEMS. Horribly incomplete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Cueball goes to tech support with his laptop, explaining all his arcane problems.

{|class="wikitable"
| ''My laptop's battery won't hold a charge.''
| A common problem...
|-
| ''Tried that. Now the new ones won't either.''
| This could be an issue with the laptop's battery management hardware.
|-
| ''Also, random files get corrupted on the first of every month. Factory reset didn't help either.''
| Some devices may be scheduled to do a "disk cleanup" on the first of every month. Somehow, this task is corrupting files that should be kept.
|-
| ''When it's plugged in, I get static from my plumbing.''
| TODO
|-
| ''And it reboots if someone uses an arc welder nearby''
| TODO
|-
| ''Transition(R) lenses go dark when exposed to the screen''
| Screen emitting UV rays?
|-
| ''...and when I open too many tabs, it fogs any nearby photographic film.''
| What?!
|}

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

:[Cueball is walking past a sign reading "Tech Support," with a right-pointing arrow and carrying a laptop.]
:Off panel voice #1: Oh, No.
:Off panel voice #2: What?
:Off panel voice #1: This guy. He has the worst tech problems.

:[Cueball at tech support desk with laptop on desk. Short-hair guy and Ponytail are there.]
:Cueball: My laptop's battery won't hold a charge.
:Short-hair guy: We can replace it.
:Cueball: Tried that. Now the new ones won't either.

:[Close-up of Cueball]
:Cueball: Also, random files get corrupted on the first day of every month. Factory reset didn't help.
:Off panel voice #2: You weren't kidding.

:[Close-up of Cueball]
:Cueball: When it's plugged in, I get static shocks from my plumbing.
:Off panel voice: What the...
:Cueball: And it reboots if someone uses an arc welder nearby.

{{comic discussion}}

2083: Laptop Issues

2018-12-10T16:54:59Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ second panel

2083: Laptop Issues

2018-12-10T16:53:00Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ first panel

2080: Cohort and Age Effects

2018-12-04T17:56:42Z

Matchups: /* Trivia */ Fixed erratum in errata

{{comic
| number = 2080
| date = December 3, 2018
| title = Cohort and Age Effects
| image = cohort_and_age_effects.png
| titletext = Younger people get very few joint replacements, yet they're also getting more than older people did at the same age. This means you can choose between 'Why are millennials getting so (many/few) joint replacements?' depending on which trend fits your current argument better.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a MILLENNIAL JOINT. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Another of [[Randall|Randall's]] [[238: Pet Peeve 114|many]] [[:Category:Pet Peeves|Pet Peeves]], this time it's statistics. It is the first in more than four years, since [[1368: One Of The]].

"{{w|Millennials}}" are the generation of Westerners who were born between the early 1980s and the late 1990s, whereas {{w|baby boomers}} are the generation born during the "baby boom", a period of high birth rates from the late 1940s to early 1960s. A common headline on news websites is "Millennials are killing the X industry" where X is a product whose sales have dropped in recent years. One of the most famous is the {{w|diamond industry}}, where a combination of the {{w|wage gap}}, stigma over {{w|Blood diamond|conflict diamonds}}, and less desire to get married early has seen millennials buying less diamond jewelry than previous generations.

Randall spoofs this idea. In the comic, [[Cueball]], as a [[:Category:News anchor|news anchor]], presents a heading about how opens his story by asking if millennials are killing the {{w|joint replacement}} industry, illustrating it with numbers of joint replacement procedures among millennials compared to baby boomers. The joke is that millennials are simply too young for most of them to need joint replacements (which are usually used to treat senile {{w|osteoarthritis}}), and millennials will likely need joint replacements in the future as they get older, potentially keeping sales of joint replacements at close to their current rate.

A '''{{w|cohort effect}}''' is a cultural difference between generations (such as buying fewer diamonds), whereas an '''age effect''' is one that is simply related to getting older (such as getting arthritis). Joint replacement rates are an age effect, but the newscast is presenting them as if they were a cohort effect.

The title text points out that although numbers of millennials receiving joint replacements are low, they are higher than the numbers of baby boomers who received them ''at the same age''—i.e. in their 20s—due to advances in medical diagnosis and technology in the last 50 years, as well as (in some countries at least) better access to healthcare. This statistic can be used to create a headline which is the reverse of the one in the comic, namely "millennials are getting more joint replacements than ever". Randall notes that you could therefore use either headline to back up your argument, depending on the agenda you are trying to present.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball as a news anchor is sitting at a desk with hands folded in front of him on the table. To the left is a presentation which includes a table with a header above the two by two table. Each of the two rows and columns are labeled.]
:Cueball: Tonight: Are Millenials killing the joint replacement industry?

:{| class="wikitable"
|+ Operation rate per 100,000
!
!Knee
!Hip
|-
|Baby Boomers
|720
|390
|-
|Millenials
|1
|3
|}

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Stats Pet Peeve: People mixing up cohort effects and age effects.

==Trivia==
*In the original title text there were two mistakes. These were soon corrected.
**Here is the original title text with the removed word in bold and below the final version with the added word in bold:
::Younger people get very few joint replacements, yet they're also getting more than older people did at the same age. This means you can choose between 'Why are millennials '''are''' getting so (many/few) joint replacements?' depending which trend fits your current argument better.
::Younger people get very few joint replacements, yet they're also getting more than older people did at the same age. This means you can choose between 'Why are millennials getting so (many/few) joint replacements?' depending '''[on]''' which trend fits your current argument better.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Pet Peeves]]
[[Category:News anchor]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Statistics]]

2053: Incoming Calls

2018-10-02T18:32:38Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Reminder calls increase due to technology changes.

{{comic
| number = 2053
| date = October 1, 2018
| title = Incoming Calls
| image = incoming_calls.png
| titletext = I wonder if that friendly lady ever fixed the problem she was having with her headset.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Anything missing? Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic shows a graph of incoming phone calls over time to [[Randall]] since he was younger than six years. The graph doesn't show the absolute numbers but the proportion of callers. Because it's safe to assume that calls from his family didn't decrease over the years, other calls just increased over time and this graph can be misunderstood because the number of calls in the recent years are probably much higher than in 1990. Randall married in 2011, so family may have increased since then due to in-laws. This leads to Randall's second header line when he states that he "finally stopped picking up for unknown numbers", which is still roughly the same fraction but the amount is much more today.

Not covered are major modern ways to communicate like {{w|SMS}}, talking on {{w|Facebook}}, or the famous {{w|WhatsApp}}. Nonetheless Randall is also known to use the old fashioned {{w|ICQ}}. But, all these other electronic connections are behind the revelation done by Randall about his phone talks as he did in this comic.

Wrong numbers used to be a small but significant portion of the phone calls that Randall received, and remained fairly steady until the late 1990s, when they began a gradual and accelerating decline, eventually tapering off to nearly none in 2015. This is likely due to the rise of cellphones and programmable land-line phones, which contain their own address books and only require the caller to enter the number once, greatly reducing the chances of accidentally entering a wrong number in general and eliminating the possibility entirely for anyone with whom you have taken the time to save their number.

Appointment reminders and miscellaneous similar calls have steadily increased with time, likely due to a combination of Randall's increasing responsibilities as he ages, and thus the number of appointments and legitimate businesses who need to contact him, and the increased use by businesses of automated reminder systems.

The proportion of friends who call Randall rapidly increased in the 1990s and began to overtake family, probably because he has gained friends over time and because as they grew up they were more likely to own their own phone, and starting in the 2000s, their own cellphones. Over time, Randall's friends and family have been less likely to make phone calls to him, likely due to the use of text messages and other messaging apps. Additionally, although there was a large percentage of phone calls from legal {{w|Telemarketing|telemarketers}} in the 1990s, this percentage has significantly dropped, most likely due to the creation of the {{w|National Do Not Call Registry}}, which allows individuals and families in the United States to register phone numbers that are exempt from telemarketers. Instead, there has been a rise in phone calls from {{w|Phone fraud|scammers}} and political advertisements. Even if a phone number is registered on the National Do Not Call Registry, they may still receive phone calls from political organizations. It is implied that the latter two groups have caused Randall to stop answering phone calls from unknown numbers.

The title text refers to a common scamming tactic in which a {{w|Robocall|robocaller}}, typically one named "Emily," will claim to be having trouble with their headset and say "Can you hear me now?" The trick is either to keep you on the line while taking a second or two to connect you to a real person to get scammed, or to get a recording of you saying "yes" for potential fraudulent use (or both).

==Transcript==
:[A line graph shows the portions of phone calls by type over time beginning slightly before 1990 until today.]
:'''Incoming personal calls over time'''
:or: why I finally stopped picking up for unknown numbers

:[The x-axis is labeled with years beginning at 1990 in five year segments up to NOW (2018). The y-axis shows a relative distribution of callers.]
:[The calls are (from top to down):]
:Appointment reminders, misc. (small growing all over time)
:Family (larger in the beginning, constant with some fluctuations since 2000)
:Friends (growing from 1995 to 2005, then decreasing but intersected with "that one friend who hates texting", after that decreasing)
:Legal telemarketers (peak in the beginning, decreasing over time)
:Auto insurance scammers (a big peak between 2005 and 2012)
:Other scammers (beginning in 2010, replacing the auto insurance, increasing until today)
:Political (starting in 2002 and increasing since then)
:Wrong numbers (constant up to 2000 and then decreasing to nearly today)

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Randall Munroe]]
[[Category:Line graphs]]
[[Category:Timelines]]

2050: 6/6 Time

2018-09-26T00:33:30Z

Matchups: Correct spelling and wikilink Daylight Saving Time, changed reference to obsolete GST to UCT, etc.

{{comic
| number = 2050
| date = September 24, 2018
| title = 6/6 Time
| image = 6_6_time.png
| titletext = You know how Einstein figured out that the speed of light was constant, and everything else had to change for consistency? My theory is like his, except not smart or good.
}}

The original image has a link to a previous comic [https://xkcd.com/1061/ 1061: EST] which is explained [[1061: EST|here]].

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Please edit the explanation below and only mention here why it isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[Cueball]] suggests a regional time system similar to that used in many societies prior to the invention of [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/experts-time-division-days-hours-minutes/ mechanical time keeping], such as [https://wiki.samurai-archives.com/index.php?title=Telling_Time Japan during the Edo period] or the {{w|Roman timekeeping|Roman Empire}}, where the day is separated into two parts based on night and day and then subdivided by hour, minute, and second to give season-variable lengths for each. This method is also named [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/temporal_hour temporal hour].

Exact points in time such as noon, sunrise, or sunset vary on the {{w|Longitude|longitude}} from east and west, while the length of day and night depends on the {{w|Latitude|latitude}}. The first problem is solved today by using {{w|Time zone|time zones}} in which at 12am the sun is in most cases not at the {{w|Zenith|zenith}} and sunrise/sunset happens at different times. The second issue is attributed to the tilt of Earth's axis and the curvature of its surface; days are longer than nights and vice versa. At the pole regions there is for a long time only day (or night) and by Cueball's suggestion the entire day would last only 12 hours.

The caption lays out the punchline in which [[Randall]] has very strong feelings and opinions on how standards of time ''should'' be measured, but as bad as he believes the official standards are he also recognizes that his own rules would not be popular with other people. After coming to recognize this he has made a hobby or game out of making the worst possible system of measuring time and sharing it with other people.

The caption, though vague, can also be assumed to relate to the gradual deviation of certain regions from the {{w|Coordinated Universal Time}} (UCT) zones with "{{w|Daylight Saving Time}}" that is observed inconsistently and smaller regions opting for awkward fractional increments of deviation from Coordinated Universal Time.

The title text refers to Einstein's {{w|Special relativity|special theory of relativity}} which postulates that the speed of light is the same for all observers, regardless of the motion of the light source (or the observers). An observer at high speed measures the same speed of light as an observer with no motion, measured from the same light source. In classical physics the speed of the moving observer would be added up but in special relativity this isn't true, instead the time runs slower for the moving observer. And additional to this {{w|Time dilation|time dilation}} there is also a {{w|Length contraction|length contraction}}, without which the geometry wouldn't work.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and White Hat are walking.]
:Cueball: Under my time system, the sun rises at 6 am and it sets at 6 pm, as it '''''should'''''.
:Cueball: The length of the second is different each day and night, and the current time shifts with your latitude and longitude.
:Cueball: Today is one of the two days each year when my clocks run at the same speed as everyone else's.

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Time standards are so unfixably messy and complicated that at this point my impulse is just to try to make them worse.

==Trivia==
*In the title text the name Einstein was originally misspelled as "einstein".
*This comic was released two days after the {{w|September equinox}} 2018 in the [http://aa.usno.navy.mil/seasons?year=2018&tz=-5&dst=1 US]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Time]]

2042: Rolle's Theorem

2018-09-05T17:03:44Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Naming rights

{{comic
| number = 2042
| date = September 5, 2018
| title = Rolle's Theorem
| image = rolles_theorem.png
| titletext = I mean, if it's that easy to get a theorem named for you ... "a straight line that passes through the center of a coplanar circle always divides the circle into two equal halves." Can I have that one? Wait, can I auction off the naming rights? It can be the Red Bull Theorem or the Quicken Loans Theorem, depending who wants it more.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Go a little bit more into the explanation. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

This comic references various theorems in calculus such as the {{w|Extreme value theorem}}, the {{w|Mean value theorem}}, and {{w|Rolle's theorem}}, which are intuitively obvious but harder to prove than they seem.

It is interesting to note that the theorem mentioned in the title text is already taken: even if this theorem is trivial, {{w|Proclus}} says that the first man who proved it was {{w|Thales of Miletus|Thales}}. Auctioning of {{w|Naming rights}}, also noted in the title text, refers to the practice of naming entertainment venues for companies which pay for the privilege, such as any of the three {{w|Red Bull Arena}}s or {{w|Quicken Loans Arena}}.

==Transcript==
:'''Rolle's Theorem'''
:''From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia''

: Rolle's Theorem states that any real, differentiable function that has the same value at two different points must have at least one "stationary point" between them where the slope is zero.
: [Example graph of a downward-pointing curve - points "a" and "b" are x-intercepts, point "c" has a vertical line to the apex, and f'(c)=0 is drawn with a horizontal line.]

: Every now and then, I feel like the math equivalent of the clueless art museum visitor squinting at a pinting and saying "c'mon, my kid could make that."

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Wikipedia]]

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-30T23:47:28Z

Matchups: /* Griswold (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965 */ first draft, with ruling, limitation, and use as precedent

{{comic
| number = 2037
| date = August 24, 2018
| title = Supreme Court Bracket
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected. However, many of them were humans who lived too far apart chronologically for that to be possible. For example, over 100 years separated Gibbons v. Ogden from Near v. Minnesota, making a lawsuit between {{w|Thomas Gibbons|Thomas Gibbons}} and J.M. Near improbable. (Minnesota is a state and could survive indefinitely, but it lost the case.) In fact, Thomas Gibbons died in 1826, making it impossible for him to be a party to a lawsuit subsequent to Near v. Minnesota, which was decided in 1931.

US Supreme Court cases are typically titled as Petitioner versus Respondent. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's {{w|NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament|March Madness}}, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law v. basketball court).

The cases are:
====Marbury v. ''Madison'' (winner), 1803====
The case {{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. Madison}} declared a provision of the {{w|Judiciary Act of 1789}} unconstitutional, thus preventing several late-term appointments by outgoing President {{w|John Adams}} from being seated under incoming President {{w|Thomas Jefferson}}. More importantly, the ruling established the principle of {{w|judicial review}} by which the Supreme Court can overturn, on the basis of unconstitutionality, laws passed by {{w|United States Congress|Congress}} and signed into law by the {{w|President of the United States|President}}. For this reason it is considered the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

====''McCulloch'' (winner) v. Maryland, 1819====
The case {{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|McCulloch v. Maryland}} established a broad interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause, specifically finding that Congress could incorporate a Bank of the United States because the purpose was to help carry out Congress' explicit powers under Article I, section 8.

====''Gibbons'' (winner) v. Ogden, 1824====
The case {{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|Gibbons v. Ogden}} established that interstate commerce is regulated by the U.S. Congress according to the U.S. Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the U.S. Congress, not with any state legislature.

On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807.

====''Near'' (winner) v. Minnesota, Jan 30, 1930 – Jun 1, 1931====
The case {{w|Near v. Minnesota|Near v. Minnesota}} is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the {{w|First Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or "scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Noteworthy it was later a key precedent in {{w|New York Times Co. v. United States}} (1971), in which the court ruled against the Nixon administration's attempt to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers.

====''NLRB'' (winner) v. Jones & Laughlin, 1937====
{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation}} was a US labor law case. It declared that the {{w|National Labor Relations Act of 1935}} was constitutional. It effectively preserved the {{w|New Deal}}, which was being pursued by US President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt}} in reaction to the {{w|Great Depression}}. Previous Supreme Court cases, unlike ''NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin'', had invalidated New Deal statutes.

====''Brown'' (winner) v. Board of Education, Dec 9, 1952 – May 17, 1954====
The case {{w|Brown v. Board of Education|Brown v. Board of Education}} the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. It stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."

This ruling paved the way for the {{w|Civil rights movement|Civil Rights Movement}}. However, the decision did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in {{w|Brown v. Board of Education#Brown II|Brown II}} only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

====''Gideon'' (winner) v. Wainwright, 1963====
In the case {{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}} the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the {{w|Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth Amendment}} to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

====''Griswold'' (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965====
In the case {{w|Griswold v. Connecticut}} (1965), the Court ruled that a statute barring use of contraception was unconstitutional, at least in its application to married couples, as there was an implicit right to privacy in the "penumbras" and "emanations" of other constitutional provisions. This ruling was used as precedent in {{w|Eisenstadt v. Baird}} (1972), which extended the right to unmarried couples, and in Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas (see below).

====''Miranda'' (winner) v. Arizona, 1966====
ToDo:{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|Miranda v. Arizona}}
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)

====''Loving'' (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967====
In {{w|Loving v. Virginia}} the Supreme Court ruled that state laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional, and were struck down. This decision was well ahead of public opinion; a Gallup poll (cited by [https://thinkprogress.org/public-support-for-same-sex-marriage-surpasses-support-for-interracial-marriage-in-1991-b29fa01c2cfa/ Think Progress]) conducted the following year showed only 20% in favor. This case was cited as precedent in Obergefell v. Hodges, listed below.

====''Roe'' (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973====
In {{w|Roe v. Wade}}, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman's right to privacy, balanced against the state's interest in limiting {{w|abortion}}s, allowed women to undergo abortions in the first and second trimesters and allowed states the right to forbid third-trimester abortions.

====''United States'' (winner) v. Nixon, July 8, 1974 - July 24, 1974====
ToDo: {{w|United States v. Nixon|United States v. Nixon}}
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)

====''Bush'' (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000====
ToDo: {{w|Bush v. Gore|Bush v. Gore}}
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)

====''Lawrence'' (winner) v. Texas, June 26, 2003====
ToDo:{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|Lawrence v. Texas}}
(invalidated sodomy laws and made same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory)

====''Massachusetts'' (winner) v. EPA, April 2, 2007====
ToDo:{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|Massachusetts v. EPA}}
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)

====''Obergefell'' (winner) v. Hodges, June 26, 2015====
ToDo:{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|Obergefell v. Hodges}}
(requiring government recognition of same-sex marriage)

The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.

In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Marbury - Madison
:McCulloch - Maryland
:Gibbons - Ogden
:Near - Minnesota
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin
:Brown - Board of Education
:Gideon - Wainwright
:Griswold - Connecticut

:[Right side:]
:Miranda - Arizona
:Loving - Virginia
:Roe - Wade
:United States - Nixon
:Bush - Gore
:Lawrence - Texas
:Massachusetts - EPA
:Obergefell - Hodges

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme Court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.

{{comic discussion}}

2039: Begging the Question

2018-08-29T18:49:37Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Added typically silly ''cite needed'' template

{{comic
| number = 2039
| date = August 29, 2018
| title = Begging the Question
| image = begging_the_question.png
| titletext = At least we can all agree on the enormity of this usage.
}}

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

This comic makes fun of the constant battle between those who maintain a {{w|Linguistic prescription|prescriptive view of language}} and those who have a {{w|Linguistic description|descriptive view}}. In the prescriptive view, language has fixed rules and fixed usage, and any usage that does not adhere to established rules is incorrect. In the descriptive view however, language is malleable and any usage can be correct if it is common and understood by most people.

The comic specifically calls out two phrases which are commonly misused in the prescriptive sense, and whose meanings have changed in modern usage in the descriptive sense:

;Nauseous
''Nauseous'' in its proper form means "causing {{w|nausea}}", while ''nauseated'' means affected with nausea.

Properly speaking, it is only correct to use the word "nauseous" to describe the food item since that was the cause of Ponytail's nausea. Saying "the food made her nauseous" would traditionally be interpreted as meaning the food somehow caused her (her body, her appearance, etc.) to become so disgusting that she now causes other people to feel nausea. As White Hat states, the proper phrasing is that the "the food was nauseous", and it "made [her] feel nauseated".

In modern usage however, "nauseous" has taken on the same meaning as "nauseated", meaning "affected with nausea". Today most people will understand "she is nauseous" to mean she does not feel well.

;Begging the question
{{w|Begging the question}} originally referred to a logical fallacy where an argument assumed its conclusion. In modern usage, it has come to mean to "raise a question or point that has not been dealt with". This is often a point of contention for prescriptivists. However, as the caption explains, Cueball has an entirely different meaning for this phrase that he created himself: "fight a losing battle against changing usage". This is actually a meta-meaning, as that is actually the common activity of prescriptivists who complain about incorrect usage; it's a losing battle, because language change is as inevitable and unstoppable as evolution in biology.

The title text also plays on another word commonly argued over by prescriptivists. "Enormity" in its classical usage means either extreme wickedness or a monstrous offense or evil, though it is more commonly used in modern writing as a synonym for enormousness. The title text intentionally{{Citation needed}} exploits the syntactic ambiguity that this creates.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Ponytail and White Hat standing next to each other talking. White Hat has raised his hand while Cueball stands behind him.]
:Ponytail: That food made me nauseous.
:White Hat: No, the ''food'' was nauseous. It made you feel ''nauseated''.
:Cueball: Come on, you're just begging the question.

:[Caption below the frame:]
:I annoy people on all sides by using "beg the question" to mean "fight a losing battle against changing usage".

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Language]]

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-28T14:33:55Z

Matchups: /* Roe (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973 */ cleanup & clarification

{{comic
| number = 2037
| date = August 24, 2018
| title = Supreme Court Bracket
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected. However, many of them were humans who lived too far apart chronologically for that to be possible. For example, over 100 years separated Gibbons v. Ogden from Near v. Minnesota, making a lawsuit between {{w|Thomas Gibbons|Thomas Gibbons}} and J.M. Near improbable. (Minnesota is a state and could survive indefinitely, but it lost the case.) In fact, Thomas Gibbons died in 1826, making it impossible for him to be a party to a lawsuit subsequent to Near v. Minnesota, which was decided in 1931.

US Supreme Court cases are typically titled as Petitioner versus Respondent. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's {{w|NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament|March Madness}}, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law v. basketball court).

The cases are:
====Marbury v. ''Madison'' (winner), 1803====
The case {{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. Madison}} declared a provision of the {{w|Judiciary Act of 1789}} unconstitutional, thus preventing several late-term appointments by outgoing President {{w|John Adams}} from being seated under incoming President {{w|Thomas Jefferson}}. More importantly, the ruling established the principle of {{w|judicial review}} by which the Supreme Court can overturn, on the basis of unconstitutionality, laws passed by {{w|United States Congress|Congress}} and signed into law by the {{w|President of the United States|President}}. For this reason it is considered the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

====''McCulloch'' (winner) v. Maryland, 1819====
The case {{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|McCulloch v. Maryland}} established a broad interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause, specifically finding that Congress could incorporate a Bank of the United States because the purpose was to help carry out Congress' explicit powers under Article I, section 8.

====''Gibbons'' (winner) v. Ogden, 1824====
The case {{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|Gibbons v. Ogden}} established that interstate commerce is regulated by the U.S. Congress according to the U.S. Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the U.S. Congress, not with any state legislature.

On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807.

====''Near'' (winner) v. Minnesota, Jan 30, 1930 – Jun 1, 1931====
The case {{w|Near v. Minnesota|Near v. Minnesota}} is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the {{w|First Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or "scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Noteworthy it was later a key precedent in {{w|New York Times Co. v. United States}} (1971), in which the court ruled against the Nixon administration's attempt to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers.

====''NLRB'' (winner) v. Jones & Laughlin, 1937====
{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation}} was a US labor law case. It declared that the {{w|National Labor Relations Act of 1935}} was constitutional. It effectively preserved the {{w|New Deal}}, which was being pursued by US President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt}} in reaction to the {{w|Great Depression}}. Previous Supreme Court cases, unlike ''NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin'', had invalidated New Deal statutes.

====''Brown'' (winner) v. Board of Education, Dec 9, 1952 – May 17, 1954====
The case {{w|Brown v. Board of Education|Brown v. Board of Education}} the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. It stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."

This ruling paved the way for the {{w|Civil rights movement|Civil Rights Movement}}. However, the decision did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in {{w|Brown v. Board of Education#Brown II|Brown II}} only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

====''Gideon'' (winner) v. Wainwright, 1963====
In the case {{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}} the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the {{w|Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth Amendment}} to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

====''Griswold'' (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965====
ToDo:{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold v. Connecticut}}
(right to birth control)

====''Miranda'' (winner) v. Arizona, 1966====
ToDo:{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|Miranda v. Arizona}}
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)

====''Loving'' (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967====
In {{w|Loving v. Virginia}} the Supreme Court ruled that state laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional, and were struck down. This decision was well ahead of public opinion; a Gallup poll (cited by [https://thinkprogress.org/public-support-for-same-sex-marriage-surpasses-support-for-interracial-marriage-in-1991-b29fa01c2cfa/ Think Progress]) conducted the following year showed only 20% in favor. This case was cited as precedent in Obergefell v. Hodges, listed below.

====''Roe'' (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973====
In {{w|Roe v. Wade}}, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman's right to privacy, balanced against the state's interest in limiting {{w|abortion}}s, allowed women to undergo abortions in the first and second trimesters and allowed states the right to forbid third-trimester abortions.

====''United States'' (winner) v. Nixon, July 8, 1974 - July 24, 1974====
ToDo: {{w|United States v. Nixon|United States v. Nixon}}
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)

====''Bush'' (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000====
ToDo: {{w|Bush v. Gore|Bush v. Gore}}
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)

====''Lawrence'' (winner) v. Texas, June 26, 2003====
ToDo:{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|Lawrence v. Texas}}
(invalidated sodomy laws)

====''Massachusetts'' (winner) v. EPA, April 2, 2007====
ToDo:{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|Massachusetts v. EPA}}
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)

====''Obergefell'' (winner) v. Hodges, June 26, 2015====
ToDo:{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|Obergefell v. Hodges}}
(requiring government recognition of same-sex marriage)

The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.

In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Marbury - Madison
:McCulloch - Maryland
:Gibbons - Ogden
:Near - Minnesota
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin
:Brown - Board of Education
:Gideon - Wainwright
:Griswold - Connecticut

:[Right side:]
:Miranda - Arizona
:Loving - Virginia
:Roe - Wade
:United States - Nixon
:Bush - Gore
:Lawrence - Texas
:Massachusetts - EPA
:Obergefell - Hodges

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme Court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.

{{comic discussion}}

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-27T20:45:40Z

Matchups: /* Massachusetts (winner) v. EPA, 2007 */ Added actual date of decision

{{comic
| number = 2037
| date = August 24, 2018
| title = Supreme Court Bracket
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected. However, many of them were humans who lived too far apart chronologically for that to be possible. For example, over 100 years separated Gibbons v. Ogden from Near v. Minnesota, making a lawsuit between {{w|Thomas Gibbons|Thomas Gibbons}} and J.M. Near improbable. (Minnesota is a state and could survive indefinitely, but it lost the case.) In fact, Thomas Gibbons died in 1826, making it impossible for him to be a party to a lawsuit subsequent to Near v. Minnesota, which was decided in 1931.

US Supreme Court cases are typically titled as Petitioner versus Respondent. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's {{w|NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament|March Madness}}, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law v. basketball court).

The cases are:
====Marbury v. ''Madison'' (winner), 1803====
The case {{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. Madison}} declared a provision of the {{w|Judiciary Act of 1789}} unconstitutional, thus preventing several late-term appointments by outgoing President {{w|John Adams}} from being seated under incoming President {{w|Thomas Jefferson}}. More importantly, the ruling established the principle of {{w|judicial review}} by which the Supreme Court can overturn, on the basis of unconstitutionality, laws passed by {{w|United States Congress|Congress}} and signed into law by the {{w|President of the United States|President}}. For this reason it is considered the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

====''McCulloch'' (winner) v. Maryland, 1819====
The case {{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|McCulloch v. Maryland}} established a broad interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause, specifically finding that Congress could incorporate a Bank of the United States because the purpose was to help carry out Congress' explicit powers under Article I, section 8.

====''Gibbons'' (winner) v. Ogden, 1824====
The case {{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|Gibbons v. Ogden}} established that interstate commerce is regulated by the U.S. Congress according to the U.S. Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the U.S. Congress, not with any state legislature.

On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807.

====''Near'' (winner) v. Minnesota, Jan 30, 1930 – Jun 1, 1931====
The case {{w|Near v. Minnesota|Near v. Minnesota}} is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the {{w|First Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or "scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Noteworthy it was later a key precedent in {{w|New York Times Co. v. United States}} (1971), in which the court ruled against the Nixon administration's attempt to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers.

====''NLRB'' (winner) v. Jones & Laughlin, 1937====
{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation}} was a US labor law case. It declared that the {{w|National Labor Relations Act of 1935}} was constitutional. It effectively preserved the {{w|New Deal}}, which was being pursued by US President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt}} in reaction to the {{w|Great Depression}}. Previous Supreme Court cases, unlike ''NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin'', had invalidated New Deal statutes.

====''Brown'' (winner) v. Board of Education, Dec 9, 1952 – May 17, 1954====
The case {{w|Brown v. Board of Education|Brown v. Board of Education}} the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. It stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."

This ruling paved the way for the {{w|Civil rights movement|Civil Rights Movement}}. However, the decision did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in {{w|Brown v. Board of Education#Brown II|Brown II}} only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

====''Gideon'' (winner) v. Wainwright, 1963====
In the case {{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}} the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the {{w|Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth Amendment}} to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

====''Griswold'' (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965====
ToDo:{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold v. Connecticut}}
(right to birth control)

====''Miranda'' (winner) v. Arizona, 1966====
ToDo:{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|Miranda v. Arizona}}
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)

====''Loving'' (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967====
In {{w|Loving v. Virginia}} the Supreme Court ruled that state laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional, and were struck down. This decision was well ahead of public opinion; a Gallup poll (cited by [https://thinkprogress.org/public-support-for-same-sex-marriage-surpasses-support-for-interracial-marriage-in-1991-b29fa01c2cfa/ Think Progress]) conducted the following year showed only 20% in favor. This case was cited as precedent in Obergefell v. Hodges, listed below.

====''Roe'' (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973====
In {{w|Roe v. Wade|Roe v. Wade}} the Supreme Court ruled that a women's right to privacy balanced against the state's interest in limiting abortions allowed women to undergo abortions in the first and second trimesters.

====''United States'' (winner) v. Nixon, July 8, 1974 - July 24, 1974====
ToDo: {{w|United States v. Nixon|United States v. Nixon}}
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)

====''Bush'' (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000====
ToDo: {{w|Bush v. Gore|Bush v. Gore}}
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)

====''Lawrence'' (winner) v. Texas, June 26, 2003====
ToDo:{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|Lawrence v. Texas}}
(invalidated sodomy laws)

====''Massachusetts'' (winner) v. EPA, April 2, 2007====
ToDo:{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|Massachusetts v. EPA}}
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)

====''Obergefell'' (winner) v. Hodges, June 26, 2015====
ToDo:{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|Obergefell v. Hodges}}
(requiring government recognition of same-sex marriage)

The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.

In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Marbury - Madison
:McCulloch - Maryland
:Gibbons - Ogden
:Near - Minnesota
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin
:Brown - Board of Education
:Gideon - Wainwright
:Griswold - Connecticut

:[Right side:]
:Miranda - Arizona
:Loving - Virginia
:Roe - Wade
:United States - Nixon
:Bush - Gore
:Lawrence - Texas
:Massachusetts - EPA
:Obergefell - Hodges

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme Court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.

{{comic discussion}}

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-27T20:40:46Z

Matchups: /* Bush (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000= */ Removed=extra=equal=sign

{{comic
| number = 2037
| date = August 24, 2018
| title = Supreme Court Bracket
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected. However, many of them were humans who lived too far apart chronologically for that to be possible. For example, over 100 years separated Gibbons v. Ogden from Near v. Minnesota, making a lawsuit between {{w|Thomas Gibbons|Thomas Gibbons}} and J.M. Near improbable. (Minnesota is a state and could survive indefinitely, but it lost the case.) In fact, Thomas Gibbons died in 1826, making it impossible for him to be a party to a lawsuit subsequent to Near v. Minnesota, which was decided in 1931.

US Supreme Court cases are typically titled as Petitioner versus Respondent. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's {{w|NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament|March Madness}}, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law v. basketball court).

The cases are:
====Marbury v. ''Madison'' (winner), 1803====
The case {{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. Madison}} declared a provision of the {{w|Judiciary Act of 1789}} unconstitutional, thus preventing several late-term appointments by outgoing President {{w|John Adams}} from being seated under incoming President {{w|Thomas Jefferson}}. More importantly, the ruling established the principle of {{w|judicial review}} by which the Supreme Court can overturn, on the basis of unconstitutionality, laws passed by {{w|United States Congress|Congress}} and signed into law by the {{w|President of the United States|President}}. For this reason it is considered the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

====''McCulloch'' (winner) v. Maryland, 1819====
The case {{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|McCulloch v. Maryland}} established a broad interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause, specifically finding that Congress could incorporate a Bank of the United States because the purpose was to help carry out Congress' explicit powers under Article I, section 8.

====''Gibbons'' (winner) v. Ogden, 1824====
The case {{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|Gibbons v. Ogden}} established that interstate commerce is regulated by the U.S. Congress according to the U.S. Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the U.S. Congress, not with any state legislature.

On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807.

====''Near'' (winner) v. Minnesota, Jan 30, 1930 – Jun 1, 1931====
The case {{w|Near v. Minnesota|Near v. Minnesota}} is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the {{w|First Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or "scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Noteworthy it was later a key precedent in {{w|New York Times Co. v. United States}} (1971), in which the court ruled against the Nixon administration's attempt to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers.

====''NLRB'' (winner) v. Jones & Laughlin, 1937====
{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation}} was a US labor law case. It declared that the {{w|National Labor Relations Act of 1935}} was constitutional. It effectively preserved the {{w|New Deal}}, which was being pursued by US President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt}} in reaction to the {{w|Great Depression}}. Previous Supreme Court cases, unlike ''NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin'', had invalidated New Deal statutes.

====''Brown'' (winner) v. Board of Education, Dec 9, 1952 – May 17, 1954====
The case {{w|Brown v. Board of Education|Brown v. Board of Education}} the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. It stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."

This ruling paved the way for the {{w|Civil rights movement|Civil Rights Movement}}. However, the decision did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in {{w|Brown v. Board of Education#Brown II|Brown II}} only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

====''Gideon'' (winner) v. Wainwright, 1963====
In the case {{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}} the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the {{w|Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth Amendment}} to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

====''Griswold'' (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965====
ToDo:{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold v. Connecticut}}
(right to birth control)

====''Miranda'' (winner) v. Arizona, 1966====
ToDo:{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|Miranda v. Arizona}}
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)

====''Loving'' (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967====
In {{w|Loving v. Virginia}} the Supreme Court ruled that state laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional, and were struck down. This decision was well ahead of public opinion; a Gallup poll (cited by [https://thinkprogress.org/public-support-for-same-sex-marriage-surpasses-support-for-interracial-marriage-in-1991-b29fa01c2cfa/ Think Progress]) conducted the following year showed only 20% in favor. This case was cited as precedent in Obergefell v. Hodges, listed below.

====''Roe'' (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973====
In {{w|Roe v. Wade|Roe v. Wade}} the Supreme Court ruled that a women's right to privacy balanced against the state's interest in limiting abortions allowed women to undergo abortions in the first and second trimesters.

====''United States'' (winner) v. Nixon, July 8, 1974 - July 24, 1974====
ToDo: {{w|United States v. Nixon|United States v. Nixon}}
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)

====''Bush'' (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000====
ToDo: {{w|Bush v. Gore|Bush v. Gore}}
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)

====''Lawrence'' (winner) v. Texas, June 26, 2003====
ToDo:{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|Lawrence v. Texas}}
(invalidated sodomy laws)

====''Massachusetts'' (winner) v. EPA, 2007====
ToDo:{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|Massachusetts v. EPA}}
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)

====''Obergefell'' (winner) v. Hodges, June 26, 2015====
ToDo:{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|Obergefell v. Hodges}}
(requiring government recognition of same-sex marriage)

The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.

In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Marbury - Madison
:McCulloch - Maryland
:Gibbons - Ogden
:Near - Minnesota
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin
:Brown - Board of Education
:Gideon - Wainwright
:Griswold - Connecticut

:[Right side:]
:Miranda - Arizona
:Loving - Virginia
:Roe - Wade
:United States - Nixon
:Bush - Gore
:Lawrence - Texas
:Massachusetts - EPA
:Obergefell - Hodges

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme Court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.

{{comic discussion}}

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-27T20:40:06Z

Matchups: /* Loving (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967 */ Poll results & precedent for Obergefell

{{comic
| number = 2037
| date = August 24, 2018
| title = Supreme Court Bracket
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected. However, many of them were humans who lived too far apart chronologically for that to be possible. For example, over 100 years separated Gibbons v. Ogden from Near v. Minnesota, making a lawsuit between {{w|Thomas Gibbons|Thomas Gibbons}} and J.M. Near improbable. (Minnesota is a state and could survive indefinitely, but it lost the case.) In fact, Thomas Gibbons died in 1826, making it impossible for him to be a party to a lawsuit subsequent to Near v. Minnesota, which was decided in 1931.

US Supreme Court cases are typically titled as Petitioner versus Respondent. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's {{w|NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament|March Madness}}, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law v. basketball court).

The cases are:
====Marbury v. ''Madison'' (winner), 1803====
The case {{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. Madison}} declared a provision of the {{w|Judiciary Act of 1789}} unconstitutional, thus preventing several late-term appointments by outgoing President {{w|John Adams}} from being seated under incoming President {{w|Thomas Jefferson}}. More importantly, the ruling established the principle of {{w|judicial review}} by which the Supreme Court can overturn, on the basis of unconstitutionality, laws passed by {{w|United States Congress|Congress}} and signed into law by the {{w|President of the United States|President}}. For this reason it is considered the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

====''McCulloch'' (winner) v. Maryland, 1819====
The case {{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|McCulloch v. Maryland}} established a broad interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause, specifically finding that Congress could incorporate a Bank of the United States because the purpose was to help carry out Congress' explicit powers under Article I, section 8.

====''Gibbons'' (winner) v. Ogden, 1824====
The case {{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|Gibbons v. Ogden}} established that interstate commerce is regulated by the U.S. Congress according to the U.S. Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the U.S. Congress, not with any state legislature.

On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807.

====''Near'' (winner) v. Minnesota, Jan 30, 1930 – Jun 1, 1931====
The case {{w|Near v. Minnesota|Near v. Minnesota}} is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the {{w|First Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or "scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Noteworthy it was later a key precedent in {{w|New York Times Co. v. United States}} (1971), in which the court ruled against the Nixon administration's attempt to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers.

====''NLRB'' (winner) v. Jones & Laughlin, 1937====
{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation}} was a US labor law case. It declared that the {{w|National Labor Relations Act of 1935}} was constitutional. It effectively preserved the {{w|New Deal}}, which was being pursued by US President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt}} in reaction to the {{w|Great Depression}}. Previous Supreme Court cases, unlike ''NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin'', had invalidated New Deal statutes.

====''Brown'' (winner) v. Board of Education, Dec 9, 1952 – May 17, 1954====
The case {{w|Brown v. Board of Education|Brown v. Board of Education}} the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. It stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."

This ruling paved the way for the {{w|Civil rights movement|Civil Rights Movement}}. However, the decision did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in {{w|Brown v. Board of Education#Brown II|Brown II}} only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

====''Gideon'' (winner) v. Wainwright, 1963====
In the case {{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}} the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the {{w|Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth Amendment}} to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

====''Griswold'' (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965====
ToDo:{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold v. Connecticut}}
(right to birth control)

====''Miranda'' (winner) v. Arizona, 1966====
ToDo:{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|Miranda v. Arizona}}
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)

====''Loving'' (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967====
In {{w|Loving v. Virginia}} the Supreme Court ruled that state laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional, and were struck down. This decision was well ahead of public opinion; a Gallup poll (cited by [https://thinkprogress.org/public-support-for-same-sex-marriage-surpasses-support-for-interracial-marriage-in-1991-b29fa01c2cfa/ Think Progress]) conducted the following year showed only 20% in favor. This case was cited as precedent in Obergefell v. Hodges, listed below.

====''Roe'' (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973====
In {{w|Roe v. Wade|Roe v. Wade}} the Supreme Court ruled that a women's right to privacy balanced against the state's interest in limiting abortions allowed women to undergo abortions in the first and second trimesters.

====''United States'' (winner) v. Nixon, July 8, 1974 - July 24, 1974====
ToDo: {{w|United States v. Nixon|United States v. Nixon}}
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)

====''Bush'' (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000=====
ToDo: {{w|Bush v. Gore|Bush v. Gore}}
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)

====''Lawrence'' (winner) v. Texas, June 26, 2003====
ToDo:{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|Lawrence v. Texas}}
(invalidated sodomy laws)

====''Massachusetts'' (winner) v. EPA, 2007====
ToDo:{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|Massachusetts v. EPA}}
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)

====''Obergefell'' (winner) v. Hodges, June 26, 2015====
ToDo:{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|Obergefell v. Hodges}}
(requiring government recognition of same-sex marriage)

The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.

In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Marbury - Madison
:McCulloch - Maryland
:Gibbons - Ogden
:Near - Minnesota
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin
:Brown - Board of Education
:Gideon - Wainwright
:Griswold - Connecticut

:[Right side:]
:Miranda - Arizona
:Loving - Virginia
:Roe - Wade
:United States - Nixon
:Bush - Gore
:Lawrence - Texas
:Massachusetts - EPA
:Obergefell - Hodges

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme Court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.

{{comic discussion}}

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-27T12:27:37Z

Matchups: Caps fix

{{comic
| number = 2037
| date = August 24, 2018
| title = Supreme Court Bracket
| image = supreme_court_bracket.png
| titletext = My bracket was busted in the first round; I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Each court case needs its own explanation, preferably a small paragraph instead of a sentence in parentheses. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|Supreme Court of the United States}} is the highest federal court of the United States. A {{w|Bracket (tournament)|tournament bracket}} is a tree diagram that represents the series of games played during a knockout tournament. [[Randall]] suggests that the winners of the 16 listed court cases will file against each other and then again until the final winner is selected. However, many of them were humans who lived too far apart chronologically for that to be possible. For example, over 100 years separated Gibbons v. Ogden from Near v. Minnesota, making a lawsuit between {{w|Thomas Gibbons|Thomas Gibbons}} and J.M. Near improbable. (Minnesota is a state and could survive indefinitely, but it lost the case.) In fact, Thomas Gibbons died in 1826, making it impossible for him to be a party to a lawsuit subsequent to Near v. Minnesota, which was decided in 1931.

Court cases are typically titled as plaintiff versus defendant. Randall is spoofing this idea by imagining famous Supreme Court cases as though they were games in the first round of a single-elimination tournament, similar to college basketball's {{w|NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament|March Madness}}, complete with a ranking bracket. "Sweet 16" in the context of a tournament refers to the stage in a tournament where 16 competitors remain. This comic's concept is thus a word play on "court" (court of law v. basketball court).

The cases are:
====Marbury v. ''Madison'' (winner), 1803====
The case {{w|Marbury v. Madison|Marbury v. Madison}} declared a provision of the {{w|Judiciary Act of 1789}} unconstitutional, thus preventing several late-term appointments by outgoing President {{w|John Adams}} from being seated under incoming President {{w|Thomas Jefferson}}. More importantly, the ruling established the principle of {{w|judicial review}} by which the Supreme Court can overturn, on the basis of unconstitutionality, laws passed by {{w|United States Congress|Congress}} and signed into law by the {{w|President of the United States|President}}. For this reason it is considered the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

====''McCulloch'' (winner) v. Maryland, 1819====
The case {{w|McCulloch v. Maryland|McCulloch v. Maryland}} established a broad interpretation of the "necessary and proper" clause, specifically finding that Congress could incorporate a Bank of the United States because the purpose was to help carry out Congress' explicit powers under Article I, section 8.

====''Gibbons'' (winner) v. Ogden, 1824====
The case {{w|Gibbons v. Ogden|Gibbons v. Ogden}} established that interstate commerce is regulated by the U.S. Congress according to the U.S. Constitution, that interstate navigation is fundamental to interstate commerce, and that therefore the power to regulate interstate navigation in this way rests with the U.S. Congress, not with any state legislature.

On 01 March 1824, the US Supreme Court decided in favor of Thomas Gibbons in his appeal of a case brought against him by Aaron Ogden in an attempt to prevent Gibbons from operating steamboats to transport goods and passengers between New York City, New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. The US Supreme Court decision reversed a prior injunction against Gibbons issued by a New York State court deciding that Ogden held exclusive navigational rights by way of having licensed them from two men to whom the New York State Legislature had granted the navigation rights in several acts between 1798 and 1807.

====''Near'' (winner) v. Minnesota, Jan 30, 1930 – Jun 1, 1931====
The case {{w|Near v. Minnesota|Near v. Minnesota}} is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that found that prior restraints on publication violate freedom of the press as protected under the {{w|First Amendment to the United States Constitution}}, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or "scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Noteworthy it was later a key precedent in {{w|New York Times Co. v. United States}} (1971), in which the court ruled against the Nixon administration's attempt to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers.

====''NLRB'' (winner) v. Jones & Laughlin, 1937====
{{w|NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.|National Labor Relations Board v Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation}} was a US labor law case. It declared that the {{w|National Labor Relations Act of 1935}} was constitutional. It effectively preserved the {{w|New Deal}}, which was being pursued by US President {{w|Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt}} in reaction to the {{w|Great Depression}}. Previous Supreme Court cases, unlike ''NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin'', had invalidated New Deal statutes.

====''Brown'' (winner) v. Board of Education, Dec 9, 1952 – May 17, 1954====
The case {{w|Brown v. Board of Education|Brown v. Board of Education}} the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. It stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."

This ruling paved the way for the {{w|Civil rights movement|Civil Rights Movement}}. However, the decision did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in {{w|Brown v. Board of Education#Brown II|Brown II}} only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed."

====''Gideon'' (winner) v. Wainwright, 1963====
In the case {{w|Gideon v. Wainwright|'''Gideon''' v. Wainwright}} the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that states are required under the {{w|Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Sixth Amendment}} to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney or lawyer to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

====''Griswold'' (winner) v. Connecticut, 1965====
ToDo:{{w|Griswold v. Connecticut|Griswold v. Connecticut}}
(right to birth control)

====''Miranda'' (winner) v. Arizona, 1966====
ToDo:{{w|Miranda v. Arizona|Miranda v. Arizona}}
(required police to inform suspects of their rights)

====''Loving'' (winner) v. Virginia, April 10, 1967 - June 12, 1967====
ToDo: {{w|Loving v. Virginia|Loving v. Virginia}}
(overturned a ban on interracial marriage)

====''Roe'' (winner) v. Wade, January 22, 1973====
ToDo: {{w|Roe v. Wade|Roe v. Wade}}
(right to abortion)

====''United States'' (winner) v. Nixon, July 8, 1974 - July 24, 1974====
ToDo: {{w|United States v. Nixon|United States v. Nixon}}
(ordered president Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes)

====''Bush'' (winner) v. Gore, December 12, 2000=====
ToDo: {{w|Bush v. Gore|Bush v. Gore}}
(disputed 2000 Presidential election)

====''Lawrence'' (winner) v. Texas, June 26, 2003====
ToDo:{{w|Lawrence v. Texas|Lawrence v. Texas}}
(invalidated sodomy laws)

====''Massachusetts'' (winner) v. EPA, 2007====
ToDo:{{w|Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency|Massachusetts v. EPA}}
(decided that the state of Massachusetts has standing to sue the EPA for not doing enough against global warming)

====''Obergefell'' (winner) v. Hodges, June 26, 2015====
ToDo:{{w|Obergefell v. Hodges|Obergefell v. Hodges}}
(allowing same-sex marriage)

The title text refers to a practice of filling out a March Madness bracket, predicting a winner for each game up to the championship. A bracket is "busted" when the result of a game is not as predicted; because future matchups depend on previous results, the whole bracket is worthless at that point. Randall "had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final", predicting both parties would win all previous rounds and advance to the final game/case. Because Connecticut lost its first-round case to Griswold, his bracket is busted in the first round.

In the second part of the title text, Randall writes: "I had Massachusetts v. Connecticut in the final, probably in a case over who gets to annex Rhode Island." In fact, there actually was a Supreme Court case ''Massachusetts v. Connecticut'' (summary at [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/282/660/ Justia.com], full text at [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17012735467934830012&q=Connecticut+v.+Massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 Google Scholar]) dealing with water rights on the Connecticut River, which flows between the two states.

==Transcript==
:[A tournament bracket tree is shown with 16 participants each on the left and right side. From both sides toward the middle the brackets reduce to eight, then four, two, and one line where the latter join to a rectangle in the middle.]

:[Left side:]
:Marbury - Madison
:McCulloch - Maryland
:Gibbons - Ogden
:Near - Minnesota
:NLRB - Jones & Laughlin
:Brown - Board of Education
:Gideon - Wainwright
:Griswold - Connecticut

:[Right side:]
:Miranda - Arizona
:Loving - Virginia
:Roe - Wade
:United States - Nixon
:Bush - Gore
:Lawrence - Texas
:Massachusetts - EPA
:Obergefell - Hodges

:[Caption below the frame:]
:Now that we've finished the round of 32, the Supreme Court will be moving on to the Sweet 16.

{{comic discussion}}

2037: Supreme Court Bracket

2018-08-24T12:43:30Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Added info on actual MA v CT SCOTUS case

1071: Exoplanets

2018-08-13T17:11:13Z

Matchups: 786 is the total number of known planets, not just exoplanets, according to the comic's test.

{{comic
| number = 1071
| date = June 20, 2012
| title = Exoplanets
| image = exoplanets.png
| titletext = Planets are turning out to be so common that to show all the planets in our galaxy, this chart would have to be nested in itself—with each planet replaced by a copy of the chart—at least three levels deep.
}}
*A [http://xkcd.com/1071/large/ larger version] of this image can be found by clicking the image at xkcd.com - the comic's page can also be accessed by clicking on the comic number above.

==Explanation==
An {{w|exoplanet}} is a planet outside of our solar system, orbiting a different sun. [[786: Exoplanets|786]] planets were known in mid-2012: 778 exoplanets and the rest in our Solar System.
Since then, astronomers have found thousands more. In the comic, our {{w|Solar System}}'s eight planets are depicted in the small rectangle above the central text. From this we find that the largest dots (red) and second largest dots (dark brown) indicate planets larger than Jupiter, light brown is roughly {{w|Jupiter}} or {{W|Saturn}}-sized, blue is roughly {{w|Uranus}} or {{w|Neptune}}-sized, and the tiny dots are small {{w|terrestrial planets}} (like {{w|Earth}}).

We only have a few ways of {{w|Discoveries of exoplanets|finding exoplanets}}. Astronomers initially used {{w|doppler spectroscopy}}, which detects minute changes in a star's movement towards or away from us to infer the presence of large gas giants or {{w|brown dwarf}}s. Currently the most successful method is to notice when a star seems to briefly get dimmer on a repeating cycle. This may indicate that a body of matter has passed between that star and us, blocking some of the light. The {{w|Kepler (spacecraft)|Kepler space telescope}} was designed for this purpose, and has made the vast majority of exoplanet discoveries.

Most of Kepler's discoveries are between the sizes of Earth and Neptune, but it's sensitive enough to detect planets smaller than Mercury (if the orbital plane is aligned with us). Kepler is only able to observe relatively close stars in a {{w|File:LombergA1024.jpg|narrow field of view}}. The great number of nearby planets implies there should be {{w|Carl Sagan|billions}} of planets in our galaxy, [[1339|assuming]] our local arm is not uniquely abundant.

The title text refers to this by saying that to show them all, each dot on the chart should hold another chart with the same amount of dots; each of these dots should then also have a similar chart, and then do this one more time for a three level deep chart. This chart would have space for 786^4 planets (786*786*786*786 = 382 billions). Our {{w|Milky Way}} contains about 100-400 billion stars. But if the chart were only two levels deep there would "only" be room for 786^3 = 0.5 billion planets.

This comic's design is similar to the {{w|color perception test|Ishihara Color Test}}, a series of circular pictures made of colored dots, used to detect red-green color blindness. However, Randall's picture probably does not contain a hidden number like it did in [[1213: Combination Vision Test]].

Two different xkcd comics have the title "Exoplanets". The first was [[786: Exoplanets]], and this one was drawn at a time when 786 exoplanets had been found. Probably not a coincidence when it comes to [[Randall]]. This is the first time Randall released a comic with the exact same name as a previous comic. Since then he has done so [[:Category:Comics sharing name|a few times]]. When this comic was released it caused problems on xkcd as the title of the image files were the same for the two comics. This was resolved by renaming the original image adding the year 2010, the year when it was released, two years before this one was released.

See also [[:Category:Exoplanets]] and this {{w|lists of planets#Orbiting other stars|list of lists of exoplanets}}.

==Transcript==
:[An large diagram of dots, mostly of varying shades of brown and greenish yellow, with a number of smaller blue dots, tiny green dots and some larger red dots. At the top of the circle are five lines of text in very different font size.]
:<big>All 786 known</big>
:<big><big><big>planets</big></big></big>
:(as of June 2012)
:<big>to scale</big>
:'''(Some planet sizes estimated based on mass.)'''

:[Below this text is a small section of 8 planets which are framed in a light gray frame with lighter gray background . It is situated right below the above text with only a few planets in between the text and the frame. These planets include two large yellow, two smaller blue two small green and two tiny green planets. A line goes between this frame to another frame with the first word in the text below, that is in a similar frame. The rest of the text follows to the right and then below this first word covering the central part of the circle from just around the center of the circle and a bit below.]
:This is our solar system.
:The rest of these orbit other stars and were only discovered recently.
:Most of them are huge because those are the kind we learned to detect first, but now we're finding that small ones are actually more common.
:We know nothing about what's on any of them. With better telescopes, that could change.
:'''This is an exciting time.'''

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Large drawings]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Exoplanets]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Exoplanets02]]

2028: Complex Numbers

2018-08-03T19:00:33Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Added too many links

{{comic
| number = 2028
| date = August 3, 2018
| title = Complex Numbers
| image = complex_numbers.png
| titletext = I'm trying to prove that mathematics forms a meta-abelian group, which would finally confirm my suspicions that algebreic geometry and geometric algebra are the same thing.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a MATHEMATICIAN - Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

The {{w|complex number}}s can be thought of as pairs <math>(a,\ b)\in\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}</math> of real numbers with rules for addition and multiplication.

: <math>(a,\ b) + (c,\ d) = (a+c,\ b+d)</math>

: <math>(a,\ b) \cdot (c,\ d) = (ac - bd,\ ad + bc)</math>

As such they are two-dimensional {{w|Euclidean vector|vectors}}, with an interesting rule for multiplication. The justification for this rule is to consider a complex number as an expression of the form <math>a+bi</math>, where <math>i^2 = -1</math>, i.e. ''i'' is the square root of negative 1. Applying the common rules of algebra and the definition of ''i'' yields rules for addition and multiplication above.

Regular two-dimensional vectors are pairs of values, with the same rule for addition, and no rule for multiplication.

The usual way to introduce complex numbers is by starting with ''i'' and deducing the rules for addition and multiplication, but Cueball is correct to say that complex numbers are really just vectors, and can be defined without consideration of the square root of a negative number.

The teacher, [[Miss Lenhart]], counters that to ignore the natural construction of the negative numbers would hide the relevance of the {{w|fundamental theorem of algebra}} (Every polynomial of degree ''n'' has exactly ''n'' roots, when counted according to multiplicity) and much of {{w|complex analysis}} (the application of calculus to complex-valued functions), but she also agrees that mathematicians are too cool for "regular vectors."

In mathematics, a {{w|group (mathematics)|group}} is the pairing of an operation (say, multiplication) with the set of numbers that operation can be used on (say, the real numbers), such that you can describe the properties of the operation by its corresponding group. An {{w|Abelian group}} is one where the operation is commutative, that is, where the terms of the operation can be exchanged: ''a \cdot b = b \cdot a''. The title text argues that the "link" between algebra and geometry in "algebreic geometry" and "geometric algebra" is the operation in an Abelian group, such that both of those fields are equivalent.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Cueball (the student) is raising his hand and writing with his other hand. He is sitting down at a desk, which has a piece of paper on it]
:Cueball: Does any of this really have to do with the square root of -1? Or do mathematicians just think they're too cool for regular vectors?

:[Miss Lenhart (the teacher) is standing in front of a whiteboard, replying to Cueball's question]
:Miss Lenhart: Complex numbers aren't just vectors. They're a profound extension of real numbers, laying the foundation for the fundamental theorem of algebra and the entire field of complex analysis

:[Miss Lenhart is standing slightly to the right in a blank frame]
:Miss Lenhart: '''''And''''' we're too cool for regular vectors.
:Cueball (off-screen): I '''''knew''''' it!

{{comic discussion}}

2027: Lightning Distance

2018-08-01T12:21:40Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ First draft

{{comic
| number = 2027
| date = August 1, 2018
| title = Lightning Distance
| image = lightning_distance.png
| titletext = The index of radio refraction does have a lot of variation, which might throw off your calculations, so you can also look at the difference in brightness between the visible flash and more-attenuated UV and x-rays.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a kid who is scared of thunder and lightning - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The usual trick for determining the distance to a {{w|lightning}} flash is to count the seconds until you hear {{w|thunder}} and multiply by five to get miles (or three to get kilometers). This works because the {{w|speed of light}} is essentially instantaneous over the relevant distances, while the {{w|speed of sound}} is 1087 ft/sec (varying a bit based on temperature), or about 1/5 mile/second.

However, the speed of electromagnetic radiation, which includes light, is not truly infinite, being 186,282 mi/sec in a vacuum. Lightning is not traveling in a vacuum and is slowed by air in a fashion which depends on its frequency. With sufficiently precise instruments, it would theoretically be possible to use this effect to determine the distance to a lightning flash, as proposed by Randall. The joke is that it is impractical for humans, both because we can't measure such small time intervals and because we can't detect radiation outside the visible spectrum.

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

{{comic discussion}}

2026: Heat Index

2018-07-30T17:30:08Z

Matchups: /* Transcript */ added

{{comic
| number = 2026
| date = July 30, 2018
| title = Heat Index
| image = heat_index.png
| titletext = The heat index is calculated via looking up the "effective temperature" in a table of air temperature and humidity values, and then adding a bunch more degrees because it feels WAY hotter than that.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a hot editor - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
Heat index, like wind chill, is a way to combine multiple factors, in this case temperature and humidity, to get a single number indicating what the air "feels like." {{w|Heat index}} gives a table, a formula, and lots more explanation.

Human skin does not directly detect temperature - only the rate of heat gain or loss. This is why a piece of metal feels cooler than a piece of plastic or wood at the same exact temperature (below body temperature, above it is the other way around) - the metal conducts heat away from the higher body temperature than a good insulator does.

So in warm weather, it's not just the temperature that matters for comfort. The humidity and wind speed also factor into it. When humidity is high, sweat evaporation is less effective at cooling us off than in a "dry heat" with low humidity.

Hence, meteorologists use a combination of temperature and humidity to come up with the "heat index" value...and a combination of temperature and wind speed to produce a "wind chill" number.

Neither scale is particularly scientific in terms of measuring how people feel - but both are a more accurate representation of comfort levels than temperature alone.

The joke here is that these numbers seem entirely subjectively chosen - and in a sense, they really are, although they are calculated from an actual formula (a multivariate fit to a mathematical model of the human body - with nine terms!) and not by guesswork as the flow chart implies.

==Transcript==
The comic contains a single panel containing a flowchart titled "How to Calculate the 'Heat Index':"
# Starts with a box: "Measure the Temperature."
# An arrow goes to a decision diamond labeled "Does it look hot enough?"
#* An arrow labeled "Yes" goes to the right to a box labeled "Done."
#* An arrow labeled "No" goes down to a box labeled "Add a few degrees" with an arrow back to box 2

{{comic discussion}}

2026: Heat Index

2018-07-30T15:54:35Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ first draft

2025: Peer Review

2018-07-27T16:26:49Z

Matchups: Needs title text commentary

{{comic
| number = 2025
| date = July 27, 2018
| title = Peer Review
| image = peer_review.png
| titletext = Your manuscript "Don't Pay $25 to Access Any of the Articles in this Journal: A Review of Preprint Repositories and Author Willingness to Email PDF Copies for Free" has also been rejected, but nice try.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a PEER REVIEWER. Needs volunteer commentary on title text. Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

How academic publishing works: When a researcher wants to publish their findings, they send it to an academic journal. The editor of the journal is another researcher (usually a college professor), ''who gets paid nothing or a minimal honorarium'' for editing the journal. The editor chooses a few (usually three) peer reviewers who are other researchers familiar enough with the study's subfield to judge the study's quality fairly and accurately, and sends it out to them for review. These peer reviewers ''do not get paid'' for the work of reviewing the manuscript and offering a detailed critique of every part of the study, from lit review to methodology to conclusions drawn from the results. If the peer reviewers and editor agree that the study was well-conducted and the paper well-written (or just needs minor revisions), it is accepted and published in the journal. The researcher ''is not paid'' for getting their paper published in the journal.

In short, nobody in the process is paid for their work except the journal publisher, who charges libraries and individuals for access to the fruit of these people's free labor. This system works on the assumption that all researchers are employed by either companies or universities in positions that require them to publish in order to remain employed or achieve promotions or pay raises. In universities, only postdocs and tenure-track or tenured professors are paid in a way that figures in their research time as well as their teaching time, which means that anyone not in one of those positions (lecturers, educators, adjunct instructors) is not paid for any research they might be doing and publishing, nor are those who are conducting research but cannot get a tenure-track job due to universities replacing tenure lines with non-tenure-track positions.

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

:[Ponytail is sitting and looking at a laptop.]

:RE: Economics Journal Submission

:We have received your manuscript "The Bizarre Economics of Academic Publishing: Why Volunteer Peer Reviewers Should Rise Up and Demand Payment from For-Profit Journals."

:We have elected not to send it out for review.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]

2022: Sports Champions

2018-07-20T20:21:16Z

Matchups: /* Explanation */ Added Hubie Green

{{comic
| number = 2022
| date = July 20, 2018
| title = Sports Champions
| image = sports_champions.png
| titletext = For a long time, people thought maybe Usain Bolt was the one for running, until the 2090s and the incredible dominance of Derek Legs.
}}

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

In an example of {{w|nominative determinism}}, the comic lists people whose surname relates to their participation in various sports. It is presented as though it was created in the far future, reflecting on champions over the decades through to the 2080s. The first three are real sportspeople, the remainder are imaginary players of the future.

The caricatures are participating in their sport, except for Jebediah who is standing at a {{w|lectern}}.

{| class="wikitable"
!style="width:20%"|Name
!style="width:10%"|Years
!style="width:15%"|Sport
!style="width:55%"|Explanation
|-
|Margaret Court
|1960s
|Tennis
|{{w|Margaret Court}} is a Australian tennis player, former world number 1, who won many competitions in the 1960s and 70s. A {{w|tennis court|tennis '''court'''}} is the playing arena used in that sport.
|-
|Gary Player
|1970s
|Golf
|{{w|Gary Player}} is a South African golfer who won nine major championships in the 1960s and 70s. Game competitors are often known as '''player'''s, for example, the golf tournament {{w|The Players Championship}}. {{w|Hubie Green}}'s name relates even more directly to the game of golf.
|-
|Lonzo Ball
|2020s
|Basketball
|{{w|Lonzo Ball}} is an American professional basketball player, currently with the Los Angeles Lakers. The 2020s decade listed is a projection of when he would likely become his most dominant in the sport, as he began playing professionally in 2017. Of course, basketball is a {{w|ball game|'''ball''' game}}.
|-
|Jake Halfpipe
|2030s
|Skateboarding
|A {{w|half-pipe|'''halfpipe'''}} is a structure used in extreme sports such as skateboarding and snowboarding.
|-
|Sarah Goggles
|2030s
|Swimming
|{{w|'''Goggles'''}} are protective eyewear used in many sports, such as swimming or skiing.
|-
|Kevin Slurve
|2050s
|Baseball
|A {{w|'''slurve'''}} is a baseball throwing technique, a portmanteau of '''sl'''ider and c'''urve'''.
|-
|Julia Chairlift
|2050s
|Skiing
|A {{w|'''chairlift'''}} is an aerial machine often used to transport winter sports participants up mountains.
|-
|Dwight Shuttlecock
|2060s
|Badminton
|A {{w|'''shuttlecock'''}} is a projectile used in the sport of badminton.
|-
|Brandon Sponsorship
|2060s
|Unclear
|Sporting professionals are often {{w|Sponsor (commercial)|sponsored}} by corporations. Brandon is holding a pair of shoes, which are probably a branded '''sponsorship''' item.
|-
|Kate Dopingscandal
|2070s
|Cycling
|There have been many {{w|Doping in sport|'''doping scandal'''}}s in the world of sport, notably cyclist {{w|Lance Armstrong}}, and {{w|Doping in Russia|many Russian competitors}} in the Olympics
|-
|Jebediah Disasterous Postgame-PressConference
|2080s
|Unspecified
|At the end of sporting events - ie post-game - there is often a {{w|News conference|press conference}} where the competitors discuss the result. Sometimes, these live interviews are a disaster. Randall has chosen to spell his name as "Disasterous", rather than the more conventional "Disastrous".
|-
|(in title text)
Usain Bolt and Derek Legs
|2090s
|Sprinting
|From the title text, {{w|Usain Bolt}} is the (now retired) world record holder for the 100 meter dash and 4×100 meter relay events in {{w|Track & Field}}. Thus Randall considers him a solid contender for this list since he can '''bolt''' down the track. However the fictional Derek '''Legs''' ends up replacing Bolt on the list, either because they are an even faster sprinter, or because “legs” more clearly and unambiguously relates to running than “bolt” does.
|}

==Transcript==
:[Two rows of people wielding sports equipment are shown, six in the upper row, five in the lower, only the last has no equipment but is standing behind a lectern with a microphone attached to it. Below each person, their name is given and the decade in which they were champions of their sport is given below their name, in brackets. Here is a list of the 11 people:]

:[Woman with dark hair holding a tennis racket]
:Margaret Court
:(1960s)

:[Cueball with a golf club]
:Gary Player
:(1970s)

:[Cueball with a basketball]
:Lonzo Ball
:(2020s)

:[Hairy on a skateboard]
:Jake Halfpipe
:(2030s)

:[Woman with dark hair wearing a swim cap and goggles]
:Sarah Goggles
:(2030s)

:[A man with a baseball cap throwing a baseball to the right]
:Kevin Slurve
:(2050s)

:[A woman with long black hair in a knit cap and wearing ski googles is standing on skis holding ski poles]
:Julia Chairlift
:(2050s)

:[Hairy holding a badminton racket bouncing a shuttlecock on it]
:Dwight Shuttlecock
:(2060s)

:[Hairy holding a pair of shoes in his hand]
:Brandon Sponsorship
:(2060s)

:[Hairbun standing next to a bicycle.]
:Kate Dopingscandal
:(2070s)

:[Hairy standing behind a lectern with a microphone on it.]
:Jebediah Disasterous Postgame PressConference
:(2080s)

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Fun fact: Every sport eventually produces a champion competitor named after a common element of the game.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:Sport]]
[[Category:Baseball]]
[[Category:Basketball]]

2016: OEIS Submissions

2018-07-06T17:53:39Z

Matchups: added more about the OEIS, by an amateur mathematician and sequencer

{{comic
| number = 2016
| date = July 6, 2018
| title = OEIS Submissions
| image = oeis_submissions.png
| titletext = SUB[59]: The submission numbers for my accepted OEIS submissions in chronological order
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by an INTEGER SEQUENCE - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The {{w|OEIS}} is the [https://oeis.org/ Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences], a listing of thousands of sequences of integers, generally of real mathematical interest, such as {{w|prime number}}s or [https://oeis.org/A005188 Armstrong numbers]. The OEIS normally expects submissions to be accompanied by references to scholarly articles about, or at least referencing, the sequence. They would not be interested in the personal or idiosyncratic sequences proposed by Randall, though they do have the [https://oeis.org/A000053 list of IRT stops], perhaps because a NY Times article mentioned that they don't.

Randall is trying to put his integer sequences on the OEIS website, including making OEIS reveal its password.
{| class="wikitable"
!style="width:10%"|Sub
!style="width:45%"|Requested Sequence
!style="width:45%"|Explanation
|-
|43
|All integers which do not appear in the example terms of another OEIS sequence
|OEIS sequences list several example terms. This requests wants all numbers ''not'' used as examples, which is an infinite set. Its also creates a paradox, because any numbers listed as example terms for this sequence are no longer in the sequence.
|-
|44
|Integers in increasing order of width when printed in Helvetica
|
|-
|45
|The digits of Chris Hemsworth's cell phone number
| This request is for actor {{w|Chris Hemsworth}}'s phone number
|-
|46
|All integers, in descending order
|There are an infinite number of integers. In descending order means you would start with the "largest" integer, which does not exist
|-
|47
|The digits of the OEIS serial number for this sequence
|This sequence is only important tautologically. It exists only to describe itself.
|-
|48
|200 terabytes of nines
|In UTF-16, a 9 takes up 2 bytes, so this would be a sequence of 1*10^14 9s
|-
|49
|The decimal representation of the bytes in the root password to the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences server
|This would give any user the password to OEIS
|-
|59
|The submission numbers for my accepted OEIS submissions in chronological order
|This would only be useful to Randall. If all of his submissions have been rejected, this would be an empty set
|}

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

{{comic discussion}}

2002: LeBron James and Stephen Curry

2018-06-04T21:25:04Z

Matchups: Changed "map of a basketball field" to

{{comic
| number = 2002
| date = June 4, 2018
| title = LeBron James and Stephen Curry
| image = lebron_james_and_stephen_curry.png
| titletext = The 538TR attempts to capture a player's combined skill at basketball (either real-life or NBA 2K18) and election forecasting.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a Basketball - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
At the time of this comic, the {{w|2018 NBA Finals}} were going on, between the {{w|Cleveland Cavaliers}} and the {{w|Golden State Warriors}}. At first glance, the comic looks like an in-depth analysis of two of the star players on those teams, {{w|LeBron James}} and {{w|Stephen Curry}}. The joke is that while comprehensive, all the statistics are completely meaningless - many don't show any correlation, and if there is one, it's extremely unlikely there is any causal link in there.

The first graph includes a nine-digit {{w|Social Security number}} issued for US citizens which is typically not considered a metric related to athletic ability. As Social Security numbers are essentially random numbers, the graph shows only the free-throw percentage of a large number of players, artificially spread vertically.

The second graph is a graph of points per game vs teammate's APGAR score. {{w|APGAR score}} is used to quickly summarize the health of newborn children, with scores of 7 and above indicating an infant has generally normal health. This graph indicates LeBron's teammates have an APGAR score of approximately 2.1. Scores of 3 and below are generally regarded as critically low and possibly requiring medical attention. Low APGAR scores can also be associated with increased risk of neurological disorders such as cerebral palsy. The joke appears to be that LeBron is a star player carrying a sub average team while their opponents the Warriors are perhaps a more well rounded team.

The shot map shows from what position Curry's shots were scored compared to other NBA players. It shows that he scored several times from outside the playing field, including twice from the {{w|bleacher}}s (which isn't a legal play), and once from the locker room (which is physically impossible due to multiple walls in between). This may be a reference to Curry's "tunnel-shot", which he performs before every home game.[https://www.sfchronicle.com/warriors/article/Stephen-Curry-s-long-tunnel-shot-has-become-10949145.php]

In the "2018 total points" table, the highlighted {{w|Golden State Warriors}} and {{w|Cleveland Cavaliers}} represent the teams of Stephen Curry and LeBron James respectively.

Magnetic north is the north pole of the earth's magnetic field. Certain animals use the magnetic field to navigate and align themselves (including migratory birds, bees, and foxes), but there is no evidence that humans are affected by the earth's magnetic field. This means that there is very likely no correlation between orientation of a basketball court and points scored.

The table at the bottom includes more unrelated comparisons.

The first fact is "have you heard of him". Although both are well known in their native United States, elsewhere basketball is considered a minority sport. So of the 7 billion people in the world it is likely less than 2% of the total population will have heard of either player {{Citation needed}}.

In NBA the top 16 teams qualify for a single elimination play-off to determine the season champion, with each rubber played over 7 games. After the fourth game fixtures are only played as required. Most fixtures are therefore resolved before the last leg. Lebron James has participated in seven playoff games 7 in his career (winning 5 of 7), and the last time his team lost a game seven was on May 18, 2008 (Bush was still President). This also highlights that James is an older athlete yet has been fairly dominant through his career. Stephen Curry's last game 7 loss actually came at the hands of Lebron James in the 2016 NBA Finals (Obama was President). It is notable that both the Golden State Warriors and Cleveland Cavaliers won their respective games 7 in their conference finals to make it to this year's NBA finals.

Both "lebronjames" and "stephencurry" are worth 22 points in {{w|Scrabble}}. {{w|Milk caps (game)|Pogs}} were a {{w|fad}} in the 1990s. In 2027, Stephen Curry will be 39 years old, which is a typical retirement age for NBA players. LeBron James's retirement age is listed as ''unknown''. This may refer to James's high level of play through his mid-30s, when typical players have a decline in their performance {{Citation needed}}.

It is claimed that their best sport is basketball. However, although they have chosen basketball as a career, this does not mean they were not better at a sport that does not offer a professional career.

Both are listed as over 6 feet tall which is not at all unusual for professional basketball players. In fact, Stephen is listed as 6'2" or 6'3" and LeBron as 6'8".

{{w|Nate Silver}} is a political commentator and founder of the website {{w|FiveThirtyEight}}, which uses and promotes statistical approaches in explaining the world. The site's two major areas of focus are in politics (especially on elections - it became famous for correctly predicting for whom 49 of 50 of the 2008 and every US state would vote for in the 2012 US presidential elections, and though it wasn't as accurate in 2016 it had given Donald Trump a larger chance of Electoral College victory than other mainstream media sources) and sports (Silver first got into statistical analysis via baseball). The presence of both sports-related and politics-related topics in the comic, however related they are (or not) with each other, seems to be a nod towards FiveThirtyEight's content.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:'''NBA Playoffs ''DataDive'' '''
:'''LeBron James and Stephen Curry'''
:'''What makes these superstars so extraordinary?'''

:[The comic consists of several plots and tables, listed here in western reading order.]

:'''Scatter plot of Social Security number vs Free throw percentage'''
:The Social Security numbers range from 000-00-0000 to 999-99-9999. No pattern discrenable, aside from points being a bit denser in the middle of the plot. Steven Curry is marked as a point on the right edge of the plot with a high free throw percentage.

:'''Scatter plot of 2018 points per game vs Average teammate APGAR score'''
:The APGAR scores range from 0 to 10. Pattern suggests a somewhat positive link between the two factors. LeBron James is marked as having a lot of points, but a low teammate APGAR score of approximately 2.1.

:'''Shot map'''
:A diagram of a basketball court is shown with dots placed where players have taken shots at the goal. Steven Curry has dots in a separate color. For the all players category the dots generally cluster next to the goal basket and in front of the three point line. Steven has no dots next to the basket, but does cluster next to the three point line. He also has several dots off the side of the playing field, including three in the bleachers and one in the locker room.

:'''Sandwiches eaten during play vs Win %'''
:A plot that suggests no relation between the factors because practically all dots are in the zero sandwiches column. 2018 Warriors have one dot marked as a high win % and 4 sandwiches.

:'''2018 total points'''
:A table listing teams and their total scores with an extra column labeled "When net is within 15° of magnetic north". The row for the Cleveland Cavaliers is highlighted and shows an abnormally high score in the magnetic north column.

:{| class = "wikitable"
! 2018 total points
! Overall
! When net is within 15° of magnetic north
|-
|'''Golden State Warriors'''
|'''9304'''
|'''330'''
|-
|Houston Rockets
|9213
|268
|-
|New Orleans Pelicans
|9161
|219
|-
|Toronto Raptors
|9156
|341
|-
|'''Cleveland Cavaliers'''
|'''9091'''
|'''1644'''
|-
|Denver Nuggets
|9020
|280
|}

:[A table at the bottom:]

:{| class = "wikitable"
!
! Stephen Curry
! LeBron James
|-
|Have you heard of him
|Probably
|Yes
|-
|President during most recent game 7 loss
|Obama
|Bush
|-
|Pog collection
|Large
|Staggeringly large
|-
|Career average Fed interest rate
|3.42%
|4.41%
|-
|Name Scrabble score
|22
|22
|-
|Best sport
|Basketball
|Basketball
|-
|Height
|Over 6'
|Over 6'
|-
|Retirement year
|2027
|Unknown
!Nate Silver
|-
|FiveThirtyEight total rating (devised by Nate Silver to combine all metrics into a single stat)
|'''37.4'''
|'''31.8'''
|'''86.6'''
|}

==Trivia==
This comic was posted the day after the second game in the 2018 NBA Finals between the Golden State Warriors (Stephen Curry's team) and the Cleveland Cavaliers (LeBron James' team). It is the fourth consecutive time the two teams faced each other at the finals, which is unprecedented in major sports leagues in North America. The Warriors won in 2015 and 2017, the Cavaliers won in 2016, and the Warriors are leading the current series 2-0.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Sport]]
[[Category:Basketball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Nate Silver]]
[[Category:Politics]]