explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3037: Radon

2026-02-27T11:47:49Z

Rexon Mobile: Outcome of Wikipedia error found through this comic

The sun is a white star. It looks yellow from within the atmosphere because blue light is scattered out of it, the same reason the sky is blue. How did physicist Randall not know that? [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 20:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:Randall is almost certainly a Superman fan, and we all know that Kryptonians get their powers from yellow suns. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:Wikipedia disagrees; The Sun is a G-type main-sequence star (G2V), informally called a yellow dwarf, though its light is actually white. It formed approximately 4.6 billion years ago from the gravitational collapse of matter within a region of a large molecular cloud. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.23.87|172.71.23.87]] 20:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::Your quote agrees with me. As @Starstar says below, it might be intentional on his part. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 20:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::: No "his quote" doesn't?? (Unless I'm understanding your meaning with "his quote") Yes the sun is White. HOWEVER, it is NOT called a "white star". Stars aren't categorized by color but by tempeture. Which I mean I guess it sorta means their catagorized by color but thats being nitpicky. Our sun is 5,772 K, which according to wikipedia means its a class-G star which is known by the not nerds as a yellow dwarf. Being a physicist means Randell is VERY aware of the category of our Sun. Repeat, the Sun is called a "yellow dwarf", therefore is Ponytail said "white star", she'd be talking about a star that is 9000 K and therfor NOT our Sun. Seriously this was like a 5 minute google search. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 21:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::: At any rate, I believe it plays into Ponytail just goofing around more than being precise [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 22:12, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:Perhaps it is intentional? [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 20:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Possible trivia: The effect used in the title text for "²³⁸Umbrella" does NOT use html formatting. It uses unicode for the almost-but-not-technically superscripted "238" before "Umbrella." On some systems, this renders with the "23" being larger than and slightly below the level of the "8". Whether Randall knew of this effect or not is a mystery. If he did know, his motivations are a mystery. Maybe the 8 is radioactive and emitted a non-massless particle, thereby making it smaller (less mass != less volume, but go with it here) and more buoyant (less weight) in the presence of the adjacent characters. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.227.105|198.41.227.105]] 21:19, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:You can't use HTML markup in the title attribute, so there's no other way to do super/sub-scripting there. He could have used JavaScript to emulate the title attribute, though. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::I see no issue with the title text's 238 when on a PC neither on xkcd or here. The numbers are all similar. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

What do people think of Hairstylist Wannabe's near-total rewrite of the explanation? While they added lots of technical details about radon, I think they missed much of the humor. Ponytail's comments are typical of the kind of things a home inspector or repair person will say to the owner, not really "flippant". [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:48, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:I like the facts but i changed the joke explantion back. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 22:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:The rewrite has waaaaay too much detail. This site is for explaining what's going on in a comic, not repeating everything you know that's related, however remotely, to the comic. Just add wikilinks to things! Like, do we really need to have repeated here how much 238U the Earth contains? How much radiation one experiences from uranium? I vote to remove a lot of the detail and just explain the comic. [[User:DKMell|DKMell]] ([[User talk:DKMell|talk]]) 23:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Possible trivia: 238 Umbrella is a common weight for a patio umbrella stand. {{unsigned|TallJason|22:53, 13 January 2025}}

I started to write another paragraph:
:The primary reason why the radon is considered more deadly than the original uranium (and thorium) is its nature as a heavy gas; the earlier states of decay remain stuck in the original rock, interstitially, whereas radon more freely leaches out. This quickly disperses to extremely diluted levels in the open air but, being a gas that is denser than air, it can accumulate to low (but potentially significant) levels in a cellar or basement, having few natural air-currents to drive the heavier gas atoms out of the sump in which the radon sits. Although each atom does not last long in this state, the resulting polonium, bismuth or lead atoms (all being isotopes that are themselves radioactive) ''can'' find themselves drifting as dust particles initially (and, after settling, easily disturbed), with the potential
...but it got out of hand. Was going to edit it down (and correct anything I'd accidentally mispoken/misedited/ispunctuated, in the initial fervour) when I'd finished, but I've got to go somewhere, so leaving it as possible inspiration for someone else to use/ignore/tear part/whatever. Have fun. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.92|172.68.205.92]] 23:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
: "possible inspiration for someone else" Good stuff, but surely it already exists (without xkcd context) many other places? Can be just linked? [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 02:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I thought, the title text was a reference to nuclear umbrella. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.200|172.68.50.200]] 07:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

"This process will render the Earth uninhabitable for humans within approximately 5 billion years." That seems very optimistic. Isn't it more like 1 billion years? --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 10:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:Yes the Earth will become uninhabitable in close to but less than a billion years. But not because the sun is expanding at the end of it's life. But because it gets hotter and begins to strip the Earths atmosphere, and this also means the end of the oceans. When they are gone, complicated life forms should not be possible. Bacteria could live until the sun possibly engulfs the Earth (it is not certain if this will happen though.) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm removing th[e] paragraph [on radiation dose] entirely, since it's wildly incorrect and adding negative value; I may or may not have time to add a more accurate discussion later, if someone else hasn't done so first:

<blockquote>The actual amount of uranium experienced</blockquote>

You're actually talking about the total background radiation exposure, not specifically radiation from uranium (and one wouldn't normally describe exposure to radiation from uranium as "experiencing uranium" in any event).

<blockquote>in any given environment,</blockquote>

No, on average across all individuals, in all environments; the amount of background radiation exposure will be much higher in some environments than in others.

<blockquote>according to Randall's own Radiation chart, is 10 microsieverts worth of radiation, on average,</blockquote>

Across all individuals.

<blockquote>over a year</blockquote>

Over a ''day''. It literally says that in the entry in the chart.

<blockquote>the amount in one's body,</blockquote>

The amount of radiation exposure due to potassium decay within one's body.

<blockquote>in contrast, is about 390 microsievert over that same timeframe,</blockquote>

No, that one actually is per year.

<blockquote>again on average. The lowest dose linked to any serious risk is in the millisievert range, over thousands of times stronger than any of these sources. Thus the radiation from radon buildup in a normal house is not of concern,</blockquote>

No, the ''average'' amount of radiation exposure per individual -- averaged across the entire population, who vary wildly in not only the uranium content of the local soil, but also the characteristics of their basements, and even in whether they ''have'' a basement at all -- is not a concern. There are plenty of "normal" houses in which the radiation from radon buildup is a concern; there are just also plenty of other "normal" houses in which it is not.

<blockquote>as long as it is properly managed in time. Instead it is radon's toxicity that is the problem, both from the radon itself and its "daughter" isotopes, that poses a danger to humans.</blockquote>

This is absolutely false. Radon and its daughter products are dangerous to humans precisely because of the ionizing radiation they emit, which has a tendency to produce lung cancer when decay occurs within the lungs (in the inhaled air for radon itself, or attached to floating dust particles for daughter isotopes). Radon itself isn't poisonous in a chemical sense at all -- as a noble gas, it doesn't react with other substances under normal conditions. Some of the daughter products ''are'' chemically poisonous, but are still far more dangerous for their radioactivity than for their chemical properties (e.g., lead-214 is far more dangerous than a similar quantity of any of the stable lead isotopes (206, 207, and 208)).[[Special:Contributions/172.70.127.191|172.70.127.191]] 20:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I think the title text has umbrella and cover because umbrellas cover things. {{unsigned|Awesome person|20:47, 15 January 2025}}

mēëêèép {{unsigned|Me a meep sheep|00:49, 27 August 2025}}

=== Error on Wikipedia ===
This comic sparked a tangentially related discussion at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry/Archive_56#Radon_and_Radium_spectral_lines Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Radon and Radium spectral lines], leading to the discovery that the spectra given on Wikipedia for multiple chemical elements (including Radon) had been wrong since 2013 -- the result of a bug in a 15-year-old Matlab plugin. [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 17:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:After about a year, the table of spectral lines in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectral_line has now been repaired and fully restored.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spectral_line&diff=1340747152&oldid=1340660204] [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 11:47, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Talk:3037: Radon

2025-01-14T17:03:31Z

Rexon Mobile: /* Radon and Radium spectral lines */ new section

Talk:978: Citogenesis

2024-11-10T06:34:40Z

Rexon Mobile: Guttenberg 2.0

Bonus points if the editor citing the work is also the person who created the fake source!'''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

The title text is not addressed in the explanation. I've read some popular science books, but they do not seem to suffer the problem cited there. Maybe there's a particular brand of pop science that is very susceptible to that sort of problem? --[[User:Quicksilver|Quicksilver]] ([[User talk:Quicksilver|talk]]) 17:48, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
:We probably never will know, but as the comic itself says: Google is your friend! I found a nice story at the [http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?t=76475 xkcd forum] belonging to the German minister {{w|Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg}}. I have added this to the trivia section.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:00, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

On a more amusing note, it is impossible to actually verify half of the obscure references on Wikipedia, as they are often magazines or books unlikely to be kept by typical libraries. One could easily fake an obscure reference if you know of a book with a title that seemingly pertains to the subject matter, but you know that the book had a printing run of less then 10,000 copies.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.63|108.162.215.63]] 18:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
:It actually happens, too. There is a paragraph on Andrei Tarkovsky's Wikipedia page about an unfinished movie project called The First Day. The article cites an obscure book only available in Russian. According to people with access to the book, there is no such project mentioned in it. Also, the ISBN code given in the article matches a different book, which happens to be Tarkovsky's published diaries. There is no mention of such a project in his diaries, either, while he writes extensively about other projects he's planning at that time. {{unsigned ip|162.158.239.6|16:28, 27 August 2023}}

Note however, that this would only work if the information is so obscure that there are no conflicting sources.
[[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 21:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

On a less amusing note it costs 30 dollars/pounds/euros to get a copy of a scientific article that may or may not be useful for journalists that may or may not have free access to said data. Or you could get a pirated copy of it from a suicidal source and have the FBI come after you instead.[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 13:24, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

This article doesn't actually explain the self-sustaining cycle that is the point of the article. It references citogenesis and where the word was derived, and references wikipedia. None of that explains the "fake article" -> "news writer references article" -> "wiki editor adds citation of news writer" -> "fake article referenced in other news". [[User:Cflare|Cflare]] ([[User talk:Cflare|talk]]) 18:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Actually in the comic, citogenesis looks very similar to cyclogenesis.[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 13:24, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

What happened to the "portmanteau" in paragraph 2? [[User:SilverMagpie|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie|talk]]) 22:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
:Never mind, I fixed it. [[User:SilverMagpie|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie|talk]]) 22:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm curious if the doubled "was" in the first panel was an intentional "easter egg" of the kind of carelessness that may be typical of somebody vandalizing Wikipedia with fake information, or if it was unintentional on Randall's part. Perhaps we'll never know. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.123|172.69.63.123]] 19:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
:I had that exact same thought when I read it. I believe it's highly possile it was intended. [[User:The Cat Lady|-- The Cat Lady]] ([[User talk:The Cat Lady|talk]]) 21:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

An example I once encountered of a much sloppier attempt at citogenesis: the article for a small, unincorporated community, near where I grew up claimed that [place] "is home to the art of cheddar winking." It cited a book that did not exist, whose ISBN number was for the Book of Mormon. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.48.150|172.69.48.150]] 13:40, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
: Another, slightly more prominent example was that a German politician [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl-Theodor_zu_Guttenberg Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg] who carries 10 given names. An unknown editor managed to slip an 11th given name into the list: Wilhelm. At first it was reverted, because there was no source. The unknown editor reverted it back. A slightly careful writer checked Wikipedia just in time to see the "Wilhelm" and took it at face value. Many other careless writers followed, some even claimed that Guttenberg would give his full name in interviews and include Wilhelm in the list (obviously those interviews never happened and were just fabricted). Which in turn then was used as a reference ("Google is your friend, people!") for the Wikipedia article. Took some time to get the false name out of the article. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.15|162.158.203.15]] 10:11, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/the-reporters-63622746 Related and interesting]... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.12|172.70.86.12]] 14:04, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

The 2009 incident about Guttenberg's name was only the first such incident. It turns out the name stated on the German and English Wikipedias (as of 10 November 2024) has been wrong since 2016. Unrelated to this, yet another fake first name ("Friedrich") that was added in 2020 has just been removed from that Wikipedia article, after four years. For details, see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Karl-Theodor_zu_Guttenberg#Buhl-Freiherr_von_und_zu_Guttenberg%3F this Wikipedia discussion]. [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 06:34, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:2863: Space Typography

2023-12-05T17:40:54Z

Rexon Mobile:

Are the dot's actually roughly in line with the distances?

[[Special:Contributions/172.71.135.78|172.71.135.78]] 21:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes they are. I eyeballed with a screenruler and calculated

* 0.40 AU for Mercury (Should be 0.37)
* 0.72 AU for Venus (0.72)
* 1 AU for earth (reference)
* 1.54 AU for Mars (1.52)
* 5.24 AU for Jupiter (4.98)

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.94|162.158.202.94]] 21:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

But what size font?[[User:Danger Kitty|Danger Kitty]] ([[User talk:Danger Kitty|talk]])
:129 trillion pt, give or take. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.109|141.101.105.109]] 23:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the decimal-point check. This is my worksheet: [https://i.postimg.cc/tRsmk3c6/Oprimistic-AU.gif Image] (open in new tab) [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 02:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The number of "e"s between h and r required to make Saturn line up is about 59 (tested using 27.2 pt font) [[User:Digin|Digin]] ([[User talk:Digin|talk]]) 22:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
: There are currently three different figures in the explanation for how many "e"s are needed. One says the title text is correct as written, brackets and ellipsis and all. One says 59. One says 85. They can't all be right. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:: "They can't all be right." Well, they can, if they don't correspond to the same thing. Are we using the font size from the comic, or from the hover text? [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 15:39, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

:: I think the [...] has to be condensing what should be a longer title text. If is was "correct as written", that's an extra 3 dots that don't correspond to planets or anything in that region of space. So unless someone can find some objects in that part of space, I think "correct as written" should be vetoed. Also, can't use periods, colons, or semicolons -- would need to separate the main sentence from the title text addition using perhaps a dash or a comma (as long as a comma isn't as comet). [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 17:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I’m curious whether randall brute forced this, trained a neural network, or did it by hand. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.179|172.70.175.179]] 22:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:He would probably answer: [[2173: Trained a Neural Net]] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.217|172.70.42.217]] 22:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Trying to prep an image of a comparison between actual orbits and the comic, but it's taking longer than i'd like [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 23:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I assume brackets around (i) are for the Saturn's rings? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.71|162.158.102.71]] 23:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:Ooh, good call. Put that in. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The long, rambling diatribe about literature seemed odd at first, but I think Charlotte Brontë would be proud she was able to represent Pluto and Charon. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.56|172.69.247.56]] 04:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the asteroid belt spans the area covered by the word "measure" [[Special:Contributions/172.71.222.152|172.71.222.152]] 14:10, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:It would be nice if the word gaps were aligned that way, but there is no obvious alignment with either the edges of the asteroid belt, or the location of the Kirkwood gaps. The asteroid belt would stretch from the middle of the M in "measure" to the P in "space", with the most prominent Kirkwood gaps corresponding roughly to the letters A, R and E. [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 15:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:If he really wanted to represent the asteroids, I think he might have found a way to include a word like "riiii[...]iiight" so there would be lots of dots. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 15:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I added the table with the count of 'e's and adjusted the wording where it said 85 'e's from the Sun to say an extra 13 'e's in the word "here". I worked this out using an image from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_System#/media/File:Solar_System_distance_to_scale.svg) in PowerPoint but don't have upload privileges to post. Would be nice if someone could do that. [[User:Denver87|Denver87]] ([[User talk:Denver87|talk]]) 15:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Amazingly (assuming my math was right so please someone check) the sun to scale would be very close to the size of the actual dots used to represents the planets. (Planets wouldn't be visible.)

I don't see why the mnemonic for the order of the planets would be relevant to this comic. Should it be removed? [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 17:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2863: Space Typography

2023-12-05T15:39:16Z

Rexon Mobile:

Are the dot's actually roughly in line with the distances?

[[Special:Contributions/172.71.135.78|172.71.135.78]] 21:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes they are. I eyeballed with a screenruler and calculated

* 0.40 AU for Mercury (Should be 0.37)
* 0.72 AU for Venus (0.72)
* 1 AU for earth (reference)
* 1.54 AU for Mars (1.52)
* 5.24 AU for Jupiter (4.98)

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.94|162.158.202.94]] 21:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

But what size font?[[User:Danger Kitty|Danger Kitty]] ([[User talk:Danger Kitty|talk]])
:129 trillion pt, give or take. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.109|141.101.105.109]] 23:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the decimal-point check. This is my worksheet: [https://i.postimg.cc/tRsmk3c6/Oprimistic-AU.gif Image] (open in new tab) [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 02:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The number of "e"s between h and r required to make Saturn line up is about 59 (tested using 27.2 pt font) [[User:Digin|Digin]] ([[User talk:Digin|talk]]) 22:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
: There are currently three different figures in the explanation for how many "e"s are needed. One says the title text is correct as written, brackets and ellipsis and all. One says 59. One says 85. They can't all be right. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:: "They can't all be right." Well, they can, if they don't correspond to the same thing. Are we using the font size from the comic, or from the hover text? [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 15:39, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I’m curious whether randall brute forced this, trained a neural network, or did it by hand. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.179|172.70.175.179]] 22:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:He would probably answer: [[2173: Trained a Neural Net]] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.217|172.70.42.217]] 22:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Trying to prep an image of a comparison between actual orbits and the comic, but it's taking longer than i'd like [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 23:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I assume brackets around (i) are for the Saturn's rings? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.71|162.158.102.71]] 23:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:Ooh, good call. Put that in. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The long, rambling diatribe about literature seemed odd at first, but I think Charlotte Brontë would be proud she was able to represent Pluto and Charon. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.56|172.69.247.56]] 04:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the asteroid belt spans the area covered by the word "measure" [[Special:Contributions/172.71.222.152|172.71.222.152]] 14:10, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:It would be nice if the word gaps were aligned that way, but there is no obvious alignment with either the edges of the asteroid belt, or the location of the Kirkwood gaps. The asteroid belt would stretch from the middle of the M in "measure" to the P in "space", with the most prominent Kirkwood gaps corresponding roughly to the letters A, R and E. [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 15:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I added the table with the count of 'e's and adjusted the wording where it said 85 'e's from the Sun to say an extra 13 'e's in the word "here". I worked this out using an image from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_System#/media/File:Solar_System_distance_to_scale.svg) in PowerPoint but don't have upload privileges to post. Would be nice if someone could do that. [[User:Denver87|Denver87]] ([[User talk:Denver87|talk]]) 15:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2863: Space Typography

2023-12-05T15:33:49Z

Rexon Mobile:

Are the dot's actually roughly in line with the distances?

[[Special:Contributions/172.71.135.78|172.71.135.78]] 21:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes they are. I eyeballed with a screenruler and calculated

* 0.40 AU for Mercury (Should be 0.37)
* 0.72 AU for Venus (0.72)
* 1 AU for earth (reference)
* 1.54 AU for Mars (1.52)
* 5.24 AU for Jupiter (4.98)

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.94|162.158.202.94]] 21:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

But what size font?[[User:Danger Kitty|Danger Kitty]] ([[User talk:Danger Kitty|talk]])
:129 trillion pt, give or take. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.109|141.101.105.109]] 23:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the decimal-point check. This is my worksheet: [https://i.postimg.cc/tRsmk3c6/Oprimistic-AU.gif Image] (open in new tab) [[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 02:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The number of "e"s between h and r required to make Saturn line up is about 59 (tested using 27.2 pt font) [[User:Digin|Digin]] ([[User talk:Digin|talk]]) 22:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
: There are currently three different figures in the explanation for how many "e"s are needed. One says the title text is correct as written, brackets and ellipsis and all. One says 59. One says 85. They can't all be right. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I’m curious whether randall brute forced this, trained a neural network, or did it by hand. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.179|172.70.175.179]] 22:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:He would probably answer: [[2173: Trained a Neural Net]] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.217|172.70.42.217]] 22:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Trying to prep an image of a comparison between actual orbits and the comic, but it's taking longer than i'd like [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 23:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I assume brackets around (i) are for the Saturn's rings? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.102.71|162.158.102.71]] 23:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
:Ooh, good call. Put that in. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 13:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The long, rambling diatribe about literature seemed odd at first, but I think Charlotte Brontë would be proud she was able to represent Pluto and Charon. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.247.56|172.69.247.56]] 04:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the asteroid belt spans the area covered by the word "measure" [[Special:Contributions/172.71.222.152|172.71.222.152]] 14:10, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
:It would be nice if the word gaps were aligned that way, but there is no obvious alignment with either the edges of the asteroid belt, or the location of the Kirkwood gaps. The asteroid belt would stretch from the middle of the M in "measure" to the P in "space", with the most prominent Kirkwood gaps corresponding roughly to the letters A, R and E. [[User:Rexon Mobile|Rexon Mobile]] ([[User talk:Rexon Mobile|talk]]) 15:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I added the table with the count of 'e's and adjusted the wording where it said 85 'e's from the Sun to say an extra 13 'e's in the word "here". I worked this out using an image from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_System#/media/File:Solar_System_distance_to_scale.svg) in PowerPoint but don't have upload privileges to post. Would be nice if someone could do that. [[User:Denver87|Denver87]] ([[User talk:Denver87|talk]]) 15:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC)