Talk:3085: About 20 Pounds - Revision history

92.23.2.208: furrfu

2025-12-27T17:09:04Z

furrfu

2001:8003:DC65:7E01:4460:4138:3D1A:2B74 at 09:08, 27 December 2025

2025-12-27T09:08:00Z

172.70.163.150 at 13:56, 8 May 2025

2025-05-08T13:56:54Z

172.70.163.150 at 13:43, 8 May 2025

2025-05-08T13:43:21Z

172.69.195.4: Poundal

2025-05-08T12:00:48Z

Poundal

172.69.176.6 at 08:39, 8 May 2025

2025-05-08T08:39:01Z

172.68.55.40: No, it's a black hole.

2025-05-08T03:23:53Z

No, it's a black hole.

172.68.0.190: Add comment about relation to AI

2025-05-08T01:15:10Z

Add comment about relation to AI

162.158.155.151: apparently I no understand da colon

2025-05-07T20:05:45Z

apparently I no understand da colon

162.158.155.152 at 20:05, 7 May 2025

2025-05-07T20:05:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 27 December 2025
Line 75:		Line 75:

	<i>to communicate with something from the 'dark realm' </i>		<i>to communicate with something from the 'dark realm' </i>
−	:It's a black hole.	+	:It's a black hole. {{unsigned ip\|2001:8003:dc65:7e01:4460:4138:3d1a:2b74\|09:08, 27 December 2025}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:08, 27 December 2025
Line 73:		Line 73:
	:Traditionally, any actual Oracles were famed for being mostly true but (in the long run) only actually useful for a fortunate few (like "if you attack now, a great kingdom will fall!", but we aren't saying ''whose''; or "trust in wooden walls!", which you then have to work out whether it might mean your navy at sea, rather than a stockade on land). Pretty much the ''opposite'' of our current expectations of AI (can be useful, but not necessarily truthful).		:Traditionally, any actual Oracles were famed for being mostly true but (in the long run) only actually useful for a fortunate few (like "if you attack now, a great kingdom will fall!", but we aren't saying ''whose''; or "trust in wooden walls!", which you then have to work out whether it might mean your navy at sea, rather than a stockade on land). Pretty much the ''opposite'' of our current expectations of AI (can be useful, but not necessarily truthful).
	:And I read this comic as having the ungarnished truth (in-universe, at least), but that doesn't really help anyone to know (except the local burrito vendor). Typical 'mystical contract' sort of thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.150\|172.70.163.150]] 13:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)		:And I read this comic as having the ungarnished truth (in-universe, at least), but that doesn't really help anyone to know (except the local burrito vendor). Typical 'mystical contract' sort of thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.150\|172.70.163.150]] 13:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
		+
		+	<i>to communicate with something from the 'dark realm' </i>
		+	:It's a black hole.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 8 May 2025
Line 71:		Line 71:

	I thought this was also just a reference to AIs like ChatGPT hallucinating facts and saying them with confidence. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.0.190\|172.68.0.190]] 01:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)		I thought this was also just a reference to AIs like ChatGPT hallucinating facts and saying them with confidence. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.0.190\|172.68.0.190]] 01:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
		+	:Traditionally, any actual Oracles were famed for being mostly true but (in the long run) only actually useful for a fortunate few (like "if you attack now, a great kingdom will fall!", but we aren't saying ''whose''; or "trust in wooden walls!", which you then have to work out whether it might mean your navy at sea, rather than a stockade on land). Pretty much the ''opposite'' of our current expectations of AI (can be useful, but not necessarily truthful).
		+	:And I read this comic as having the ungarnished truth (in-universe, at least), but that doesn't really help anyone to know (except the local burrito vendor). Typical 'mystical contract' sort of thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.150\|172.70.163.150]] 13:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <!-- Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom. -->
 Wow - first here! I can't help thinking 'about 20 pounds' could be exactly 10 kg! 0r even one Newton?! [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 05:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
-::No you weren't. I got here about two hours ago. (sorry if i'm being mean or condencending)
+::No you weren't. I got here about two hours ago. (sorry if i'm being mean or condencending) {{unsigned ip|172.69.176.6|08:39, 8 May 2025|or disingenuously late...}}
 :"One Newton" and "10 kg" are totally different things. "10 kg" would cause 1 Newton of gravitational force if you were in a world with about 1% of Earth's gravity, though. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.109.86|172.69.109.86]] 09:53, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
 ::Oops! In my rush I should have checked and put 100 Newtons. I was relying on 10kg being about 22 pounds, or rather the other way around, and then a particle having mass not weight and Science using Metric units. Apologies. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 11:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 :I might be missing some humour here, but the pound is actually a measure of mass, just like the gram, so it doesn't vary from a planet to another. You might have fallen prey to the second paragraph of the {{w|pound-force|wikipedia article about the pound-force}}, which states: 'Pound-force should not be confused with pound-mass (lb), often simply called "pound"' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.127.160|172.71.127.160]] 14:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
 :Indeed, when I was at school in England in the sixties, I was taught the pound was a unit of mass, and the Imperial unit of force was the poundal, the force needed to accelerate one pound mass at one foot per second per second.--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.4|172.69.195.4]] 12:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
 Is this, by chance, the Internet Oracle? [[Special:Contributions/104.23.187.126|104.23.187.126]] 13:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 <BR>If Randall wanted to use mass, then he should have used the imperial unit of slug, but I suppose saying that a DM particle is 0.62162 slugs might not give the readers quite the same impression as using 20 pounds. [[User:Galeindfal|Galeindfal]] ([[User talk:Galeindfal|talk]]) 13:38, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
 :I might be missing some humour here, but the pound is actually a measure of mass, just like the gram, so it doesn't vary from a planet to another. You might have fallen prey to the second paragraph of the {{w|pound-force|wikipedia article about the pound-force}}, which states: 'Pound-force should not be confused with pound-mass (lb), often simply called "pound"' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.127.160|172.71.127.160]] 14:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
 Is this, by chance, the Internet Oracle? [[Special:Contributions/104.23.187.126|104.23.187.126]] 13:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 My physics skills are rusty but 20 pounds is much more than the Planck mass. Doesn't this imply that Randall's dark matter particles would be black holes? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.243.107|172.68.243.107]] 10:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
 :Yes, you are right that 9 kg is about 417,000,000 times more than the Planck mass (21.76 μg), but no, that doesn't imply that 9 kg dark matter particles would be black holes, for that particle can be larger than 417,000,000 Planck lengths (1 Planck length is c. 1.616255×10<sup>–35</sup> m, so above 7 rm, this particle would not collapse into a black hole). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.81|172.68.245.81]] 10:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
 Since it's Star Wars day and the 20 lbs. reference would be causing a massively large amount of mass, would it be safe to say that they "sense a great disturbance in the force?" [[Special:Contributions/67.84.20.42|67.84.20.42]] 10:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:15, 8 May 2025
Line 65:		Line 65:

	I pride myself on being a physics nerd, but also somewhat a writing nerd. I read the article, and the stuff after the mention of a gravitational telescope, and thinking of the non-physics nerds who might be reading it, and... well, this is the closest I've come to wishing there was an explainexplainxkcd.com. // I feel sheepish for not having any revisions to propose, and grateful to whomever wrote this version, but damn. Blame it on the subject material, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.206\|172.70.135.206]] 20:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)		I pride myself on being a physics nerd, but also somewhat a writing nerd. I read the article, and the stuff after the mention of a gravitational telescope, and thinking of the non-physics nerds who might be reading it, and... well, this is the closest I've come to wishing there was an explainexplainxkcd.com. // I feel sheepish for not having any revisions to propose, and grateful to whomever wrote this version, but damn. Blame it on the subject material, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.206\|172.70.135.206]] 20:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
		+
		+	I thought this was also just a reference to AIs like ChatGPT hallucinating facts and saying them with confidence. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.0.190\|172.68.0.190]] 01:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:05, 7 May 2025
Line 64:		Line 64:
	I liked the use of ludicrous mass. Brought to mind Space Balls and {{w\|ludicrous speed}}. (I haven't thought of a way to make an appropriate tangential reference in the article.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.36\|162.158.41.36]] 19:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)		I liked the use of ludicrous mass. Brought to mind Space Balls and {{w\|ludicrous speed}}. (I haven't thought of a way to make an appropriate tangential reference in the article.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.36\|162.158.41.36]] 19:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

−	:I pride myself on being a physics nerd, but also somewhat a writing nerd. I read the article, and the stuff after the mention of a gravitational telescope, and thinking of the non-physics nerds who might be reading it, and... well, this is the closest I've come to wishing there was an explainexplainxkcd.com. // I feel sheepish for not having any revisions to propose, and grateful to whomever wrote this version, but damn. Blame it on the subject material, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.206\|172.70.135.206]] 20:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)	+	I pride myself on being a physics nerd, but also somewhat a writing nerd. I read the article, and the stuff after the mention of a gravitational telescope, and thinking of the non-physics nerds who might be reading it, and... well, this is the closest I've come to wishing there was an explainexplainxkcd.com. // I feel sheepish for not having any revisions to propose, and grateful to whomever wrote this version, but damn. Blame it on the subject material, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.206\|172.70.135.206]] 20:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 63: / Line 63: @@
 I am puzzled by this statement, which started the paragraph about 20 lbs being ludicrous for a fundamental particle.  I think conservation of mass-energy is one of our most fundamental understandings of the universe.  The rest of the paragraph does not develop further on the idea of conservation violation.  If you know what was intended by this statement and think it is important, please clarify it and put it back in.
 I liked the use of ludicrous mass.  Brought to mind Space Balls and {{w|ludicrous speed}}.  (I haven't thought of a way to make an appropriate tangential reference in the article.)  [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.36|162.158.41.36]] 19:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
 I pride myself on being a physics nerd, but also somewhat a writing nerd. I read the article, and the stuff after the mention of a gravitational telescope, and thinking of the non-physics nerds who might be reading it, and... well, this is the closest I've come to wishing there was an explainexplainxkcd.com. // I feel sheepish for not having any revisions to propose, and grateful to whomever wrote this version, but damn. Blame it on the subject material, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.206|172.70.135.206]] 20:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)