explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1875: Computers vs Humans

2022-05-20T11:59:05Z

Noaqiyeum:

Definitely related to https://xkcd.com/1263/ and https://xkcd.com/1002/ to a lesser extent. [[User:MrNinja|MrNinja]] ([[User talk:MrNinja|talk]]) 16:03, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
:Agreed and have added both to the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

I think the bot's version of the <code><nowiki>{{incomplete}}</nowiki></code> template param was better… [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]]

Wake me up when computers can beat humans in Football (soccer), Football (gridiron), Basketball, Baseball, etc. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 02:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

So far, these kind of contests always work like this: human will pick a goal and formulate rules, then groups of humans spend lot of time programming computer specifically for that goal and then the computer competes against some human. I'm waiting for contest where the human picking a goal would explain the rules to computer the same way he did to human, and no humans would be helping the computer to understand. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Making a computer "not care" for something is impossible, first you need to program the code for the thing and then program the code for the computer to disregard that thing. The computer must care for the thing before trying no to care about it.
----

On the contrary, I would say making a computer system "care" is harder than making it not care. My computer system does "not care" about ANYTHING, and has never cared, even before I turned it on. When I write any program, the system will blithely execute it, whether it's to perform an infinite loop or divide by zero or do a machine-learning task. The machine acts in as deterministic and uncaring fashion as a water pistol or rock. I throw a rock, and it skips over the surface of a lake, and then sinks.

I will agree that programmers generally care about the output of their program's response to input data (e.g. giving winning moves in Go), but whether the computer succeeds or not, it does not care. The goal is not one adopted by the computer--the goal is given to the programmers who generate computer code to attempt to achieve that goal. The computer follows the algorithm and all the results follow from this and the input data.

[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 07:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

A MACHINE DOES NOT CARE.
- "The Gulf Between", by Tom Godwin
[[User:Noaqiyeum|Noaqiyeum]] ([[User talk:Noaqiyeum|talk]]) 11:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2621: Mainly Known For

2022-05-20T10:06:31Z

Noaqiyeum:

Title text: the movies are Star Wars, 1) Keira Knightly starred as one of the handmaidens of Padme, 2) The Land Before Time had George Lucas as executive producer 3) The guy from Jurassic Park and Ghostwriter is Samuel L. Jackson 4) Billie Lourd's mom is Carrie Fisher.--[[Special:Contributions/172.70.254.121|172.70.254.121]] 04:19, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
:The hard part must have been finding out that she did script work, because she is not credited for this even on IMDb... I would like a citation for that actually, rather than the silly ones that was in the explanation at this time. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Re. John Lennon/Ringo Starr: Could one make the argument that the whole Beatles section is further proof of Megan's tendencies because Ringo is widely cited as the least famous and recognisable of the Beatles, meaning that the fact that she mentions him before the probably much more famous Paul McCartney and George Harrison is also misjudging who the Beatles are mainly known for consisting of??
:Agree that this could be mentioned --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
:Being the "least famous Beatle" still makes him one of the most famous people in the world. You have to go to Pete Best, the original drummer he replaced, to have a Beatle that isn't known by most most people. I also think Ringo may have been more well known during the Beatles' heyday, as he seemed to be more vocal in interviews than George Harrison, who was the "quiet one". He didn't have as big a solo career as the others after the breakup, but that's also a high bar. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
::It's not just whether he's the least well known of the four, though. Apparently, to Megan, he's more well known than Lennon, who is certainly the most well-known of them to the rest of the world. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.44|172.70.86.44]] 13:41, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Without having read the above (Barmar), I recently added in the George detail myself. I mean, personally, I found Ringo more memorable than George (individually, but also a hint of "the Fab four are John, Paul, ummm.... And Ringo!" as Mr Starkey's nick-/stage-name is so much more distinctive).
:::Ringo continued(/ues) to perform beyond the Beatles, and not just as drummer, far more than George who did perform but seemed to move into behind-the-scenes Producer-like and/or financially backing roles for classic/cult-classic projects like Life Of Brian/Time Bandits.
:::I think George's impact on the Beatles, and beyond, was not at all small but was generally less prominent (except maybe for his Bangladesh fundraising/etc) than Ringo who managed to be front-of-house, in various capacities, a lot more. Not quite to the level of Paul (his only current active 'competition', given that the others in the running succumbed to mortality) but his innate firstname-recognition certainly leaves him not far behind. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.237|172.69.33.237]] 15:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Paul? George? Put me as another person who knows only Lennon and Ringo. Also note that someone who has interest in movies but much less interest in music, remembering singers by what movies they starred in makes sense. Even remembering Jobs for Pixar would be at least consistent. Of course, then she doesn't know Star Wars by name or by one of most important characters in it ... while knowing someone who played in the last trilogy. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 20:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
::Hang on. Hang ON. Is anybody seriously taking a "Paul McCartney? George Harrison? Yeah...? I've kind of heard of them, I guess?" kind of attitude?
::Like, really? REALLY?!
::Like..."Burger...'King,' I think? MacKenzies for a third-pounder Big Mac? Kentucky Fried Something? I think...or was it Tennessee? No, no, pretty sure it's Kentucky."
::"That dude on the Buck: Jeff Washingburn, right?"
::John, Paul, George and Ringo. Even if you don't care, you can't not know.[[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 01:26, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
:::No, I unironically would not be able to tell you the third one. Lennon is The Beatle, McCartney I recognise but didn't realise was a Beatle for years, Ringo at least has a distinctive name but I might mistake him for a Marx Brother. [[User:Noaqiyeum|Noaqiyeum]] ([[User talk:Noaqiyeum|talk]]) 10:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Question in general, but don't know where to ask: why are panels 1, 2 and 4 boxed off, and is 3 open? Going back in time, the first example I found where a panel is not boxed off, is [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2581:_Health_Stats Health Stats], in which it's also the 3rd one that is open...[[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.89|162.158.233.89]] 10:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
:No it is relatively common, but something that I strive to mention when it happens, as it is a defining characteristic of those comics where it occurs. I'm not sure I have used the same wording every time, but searching for ''[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=%22in+a+frameless+panel%22 in a frameless panel]'' I got 35 results from other comics transcripts. So Randall uses this on a regular basis. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
::I think it's a nice stylistic choice. 'Borderless' frames that are defined by the borders of adjacent frames (usually to left and right, but occasionally above and below rather than the 'virtual' boundary that is the natural continuation of the margin betwixt image-edge and adjacent explicit frame-edges) give a sense of openness where strict 'each cell is bounded' could be seen as claustrophobic and wasteful of actual comic real-estate.
::And it's done quite a bit, yes. Maybe the reason you (162.158.233.89) hadn't noticed it was just that it was so naturally done? Consider it yet another reason to browse back through old comics, just to pick up these little quirks. Like the peculiar "TH"-kerning which is another Randallesque bit of idiosynchratic penmanship, etc. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.237|172.69.33.237]] 15:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

== You DO know who Michael Jordan is, right? ==

Sure I do! Space Jam. [[User:Fephisto|Fephisto]] ([[User talk:Fephisto|talk]]) 19:20, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
: Seconding that. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

This may be too much of a stretch, but calling Samuel Jackson "the guy from Jurassic Park" may be an oblique reference to Epic Rap Battles of History, Steven Spielberg vs Alfred Hitchcock - where at one point, Tarantino's lyrics are "Ask anybody, 'What's your favorite Sam Jackson part?' No-one's gonna say 'What's his name from Jurassic Park?'" [[Special:Contributions/172.70.219.26|172.70.219.26]] 05:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2529: Unsolved Math Problems

2022-05-20T09:07:14Z

Noaqiyeum:

Does anyone have any clue whether the writing on the board in the weirdly abstract panel means anything? Maybe add an explanation about it?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.227.91|162.158.227.91]] 13:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I think it is also "ill-formed" in the sense that it is not very carefully written.

Center panel possibly related to "The drunkards walk" and theories on randomised motion.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/random-walk-puzzle-solution-20160907/
More references https://mathworld.wolfram.com/RandomWalk.html

Someone's gotta point out that "walking randomly on a grid, never visiting the same square twice" would rapidly trap you in a corner (even the example has a 50/50 chance of that happening on the next move) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.125|172.70.130.125]] 04:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Not if it's an infinite grid.

I think there's two different ways to interpret the question - as a uniform random element of the set of all non-self-intersection NxK length paths, in which case it's fine, or as a path defined by a random walk in which moves onto your own path are not allowed, which doesn't seem well defined, since you might end up in a situation where you are surrounded by your own path and cannot continue for all NxK steps.

An early example of a cursed problem is the Cantor Function. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantor_function

I admire whoever wrote the description of the curve in the "cursed" panel. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 05:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

"Algebreic" is a misspelling of "algebraic". Could Randall really have made this mistake, or is it another malamanteau? What does "breic" come from? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 06:10, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I wonder if Randall was actually referring to that quote about "Into the Woods", or he just thought "Sondheim calculus" sounded cool and it was a total coincidence. I found it when I googled "sondheim calculus" to make sure it wasn't a real thing. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 06:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

In panel 2, what would 'k' be? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.108|172.69.35.108]] 08:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

'k' would represent the number of marbles placed on the ground. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.127|162.158.88.127]] 08:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
:Though probably correct, I think the implied state is that an integer multiple (k) of N steps is made (s=N*k), with that number of marbles dropped, not s=(N*k)+c steps (for N>c) which would have the same result (uselessly) for all values of s where c ranges 0..N-1. It just introduces inflections into the graph (with s as an axis) that needn't be there (with just a k-based one). Or, in other words, selectively poll all s-values that are exactly divisible by N, and forget all the rest. (That divisor is k, and hence k is the number of marbles. Or perhaps k+1 if you leave one on the starting spot too.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.25|162.158.159.25]] 21:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

To me, the cursed curve looks a bit like a crosier https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crosiere_of_arcbishop_Heinrich_of_Finstingen.jpg

--> I had the same impression and added it. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.219|162.158.94.219]] 11:40, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

No explanation of the "Euler Field Manifold Hypergroup (Isomorphic to a)..." part?

The cursed curve looks almost like someone took a graph of the Binet formula in the complex plane, stretched it out a bit, and rotated it onto the i axis.
: This was my first thought too when I saw it. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.87|172.69.34.87]] 17:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
: It looks like Vulcan script to me. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
: That's what it looks like to me too; recognized it from that Numberphile video on Fibonacci numbers in the complex plane [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.245|108.162.245.245]] 07:36, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
: It looks to me like someone has raised a dark spirit, which is about to manifest from a column of black smoke. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.206|162.158.154.206]] 10:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Could the cursed curve be a reference to the logistic map?

Can someone produce a high resolution image of the Cursed Curve? It needs to be on a T-shirt [[User:Avimimus|Avimimus]] ([[User talk:Avimimus|talk]]) 21:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Is someone going to mention the title text?

I swear I've seen that third plot, I thought it was in XKCD, but a quick run through tagged entries didn't find anything... unfortunately I consume a lot of math media so I can't place it. It's bugging me so I hope this note will serve as encourgement to someone that DOES remember [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.221|162.158.106.221]] 21:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
:I'm sure I've seen components of the cursed-curve, not sure if they fit together like that, easily, though. The differentiation of dy/dt (which is odd in itself) of the first (lower) bit looks discontinuous, followed by a chaotic oscilation (may just be the culmination of the less frenetic chaos that created the first set of x=f(y) - again, an unusual way round) that then settles into a pattern where ''regardless'' of the 'prime axis', you have multiple real roots on the other, towards some great-attractor value.
: In more standard x/y (or y=f'(x)?) notation, it is clear that there are multiple real roots for various values of x within a range, and possible none at all beyond that (or it's a plotting error insofar as x tends to ±infinity it has a very narrow range of y that is never sampled properly, but should connect to that pulse 'randomness'). If it's a plot of real vs imaginary components of a complex function to a different continuous value, I suspect someone is playing silly-buggers with multiple (perhaps nested?) trigonometric functions, polynomials and variable-shifted powers. But it's nearly thirty years since I did mathematics at the level needed to disentangle this neatly (back when Mandelbrots and Julias were still a staple wall-poster for any student not more into the likes of Iron Maiden skull-motifs or <insert your favourite classic film here>, and even then it might be) so don't ask me where to start. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.140|162.158.89.140]] 16:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

To me the curve in panel three looks like a cursed (ha) mixture of an oscillatory time responses of dynamic systems with either an Nquist plot or simply trajectories of eigenvalues (of a stable system) at the end. Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_stability_criterion#Nyquist_plot , https://electronicscoach.com/time-response-of-second-order-system.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenvalues_and_eigenvectors [[User:Domi|Domi]] ([[User talk:Domi|talk]])Domi

Are there any examples of "cursed" math problems? I've seen "weirdly abstract" and "weirdly concrete" ones, but not "cursed" ones. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.117|162.158.63.117]] 01:03, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

:: Some functions definitely make graphs that look weird to humans for reasons that are not immediately obvious (see <code>sin(cos(tan(xy))) = sin(cos(tan(x))) + sin(cos(tan(y)))</code>: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/mt08x3yqxj). I suppose to be cursed in the sense I take here, it would have to be unsolved as to ''why'' it looks weird to humans, which is probably not the case in my example, but I imagine there are examples. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.92|141.101.99.92]] 19:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

The symbol in the third panel looks like an unalome, which is not a mathematical symbol but a Buddhist or mystical one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yantra_tattooing#Types_and_designs

There is at least one paper on arxiv defining quasimonoid, 1401.7748. It's from 2014 so it existed long before the comic. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.253|162.158.88.253]] 14:04, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Links, '''please'''! Not all of us are mathematicians. If you mention something that you think the cursed curve might represent, please provide a link to something describing that something so the rest of us can read it and attempt to learn more. [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 17:44, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

That cursed squiggle reminds me of the zeta function: https://www.johndcook.com/blog/2019/11/29/near-zeros-of-zeta/

That cursed squiggle sure looks like the sort of thing that used to flow from {{w|Saul Steinberg}}'s pen, as seen in the pages of the New Yorker back in the 60s. The most relevant example I can find right now is from 1965: https://fineartamerica.com/featured/new-yorker-february-20th-1965-saul-steinberg.html [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.177|162.158.255.177]] 03:38, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

So, is the middle one an actual unsolved problem? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.236|162.158.91.236]] 16:07, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

In this comic ponytail is obviously not Dr. Adams. (Discussion came up two comics ago.) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.115|162.158.88.115]] 21:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Is Panel #2 a real unsolved problem? It reads like one.

Adding to the first comment - should we include an explanation of the formula in the first panel as well? The denominator means "is an element of aleph-5, the fifth [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number infinite cardinal number]". The numerator is less clear; a dot over a variable usually indicates a derivative, but I haven't seen a dot over a set. Raising R (set of real numbers) to the power of Z (set of integers) refers to the set of all functions from the integers to the reals. I don't recognize the diamond with a line through the bottom or the two arrows.

Shout-out to whoever wrote the incomplete tag. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.172|162.158.74.172]] 20:21, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Is there a reason why the article uses "millennium" (correct) and "millenium" (incorrrect)?

:Maybe bad spelling by one or more editors? The spelling has now been fixed where it was incorrect. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 02:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I swear I recognize the Cursed Curve as the art from the story "The Theory that Jack Built", from "The Space Child's Mother Goose", by Frederick Winsor. Haven't been able to find my copy, so still not sure. [[User:Elkern|Elkern]] ([[User talk:Elkern|talk]]) 21:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

In the transcript, the first 3 characters of the equation in panel 1 are showing up as basic squares for me. When I go into editing mode, I see the correct rendering of the characters in the wikitext, just not on the page itself. Don't know if this might create/indicate a problem for screen readers. I'm viewing the page on Chrome 94, in Windows 10 version 1909. [[User:Dansiman|Dansiman]] ([[User talk:Dansiman|talk]]) 21:12, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I made an attempt to explain Euler fields, manifolds, and hypergroups; I think I hit "understandable", but definitely not "concise". If they could be as concise as the other entries, though, I guess someone else would have written them before me.
I'm not sure "meta-algebra" is actually a thing - metamathematics is the application of mathematical principles to the study of mathematics, and algebra is mathematical notation and symbology, so algebra about algebra would be... semiotics? [[User:Noaqiyeum|Noaqiyeum]] ([[User talk:Noaqiyeum|talk]]) 09:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC)