Difference between revisions of "Main Page"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
m (New here?)
(Try to put contribution score back in to see if this will cause any problems. Sinde the problems we had when I removed it did not stop just because I moved it it may have had nothing to do with it)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 14: Line 14:
  
 
== New here? ==
 
== New here? ==
Create your account [[Special:UserLogin/signup|here]].
+
<div style="float:right; margin: 0 0 1em 1em">{{Special:ContributionScores/10/7/nosort,notools}}<div style="font-size:0.85em; width:28em; font-style:italic">[[Special:ContributionScores|Lots of people]] contribute to make this wiki a success. Many of the recent contributors above have [{{fullurl:Special:Contributions|contribs=newbie}} just joined]. You can do it too! Create your account [[Special:UserLogin/signup|here]].</div></div>
  
 
You can read a brief introduction about this wiki at [[explain xkcd]]. Feel free to [[Special:UserLogin/signup|create an account]] and contribute to the wiki! We need explanations for xkcd [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|comics]], [[:Category:Characters|characters]], [[What If? chapters|''What If?'' articles]], and [[:Category:xkcd|everything in between]]. If it is referenced in an [[xkcd]] comic, it should be here.
 
You can read a brief introduction about this wiki at [[explain xkcd]]. Feel free to [[Special:UserLogin/signup|create an account]] and contribute to the wiki! We need explanations for xkcd [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|comics]], [[:Category:Characters|characters]], [[What If? chapters|''What If?'' articles]], and [[:Category:xkcd|everything in between]]. If it is referenced in an [[xkcd]] comic, it should be here.

Latest revision as of 19:52, 31 July 2025

Welcome to the explain xkcd wiki!
We have an explanation for all 3191 xkcd comics, and only 57 (1.8%) are incomplete. Help us finish them!

 Go to this explanation

Latest comic

Telescope Types
I'm trying to buy a gravitational lens for my camera, but I can't tell if the manufacturers are listing comoving focal length or proper focal length.
Title text: I'm trying to buy a gravitational lens for my camera, but I can't tell if the manufacturers are listing comoving focal length or proper focal length.

Explanation

This comic shows diagrams of a number of different types of telescope, some real and others made up by Randall. It includes both refracting and reflecting designs; see 1791: Telescopes: Refractor vs Reflector for the important (according to Randall) differences between them.

Type Real? Refractor/Reflector Description
Prime Focus Yes Reflector A telescope design where the observer/receiver is situated at the focal point of a single mirror. Rare in optics, but a common design in radio telescopes.
Herschelian Yes Reflector A telescope design much akin to Prime Focus but with the mirror tilted so that the observer does not block incoming light. Named after astronomer William Herschel.
Newtonian Yes Reflector Newtonian telescopes employ a second, flat mirror along with the primary parabolic mirror.
Galilean Yes Refractor What might usually come to mind when picturing a telescope. A long tube that uses lenses rather than mirrors (making it a refracting telescope) to magnify images.
Keplerian Yes Refractor An improvement on Galilean telescopes, using a convex lens rather than a concave one at the eyepiece (as shown in the diagram). It does however invert images.
Gregorian Yes Reflector Uses two concave mirrors, the secondary being placed beyond the primary's focal point. The image is reflected back through a hole in the primary mirror. Unique among reflectors in that the image is not inverted.
Cassegrain Yes Reflector Similar to prime focus, but uses a secondary mirror to reflect light through a hole in the primary mirror to the observer (situated at the rear)
Cardboard tube Yes, but not as a telescope Neither Looking through a tube helps you focus by removing distractions, but doesn't magnify the object being viewed.
Kaleido Yes, but not as a telescope Reflector? A kaleidoscope isn't really a telescope, because the non-viewing end is closed. You view many reflections of tiny objects at the end, rather than remote objects. The mirrors are also usually flat, so there's no magnification.
Liquid Mirror Yes Reflector A telescope with the same design as Prime Focus, using a rotating pool of reflective liquid (most commonly mercury) as a mirror. The diagram adds a straw so that someone can drink the liquid. This would likely not end well for the drinker.
Narcissian Yes, but not as a telescope Reflector This is like a prime focus telescope, but the focus is outside the end of the telescope where the viewer is located. So they can only see themselves, greatly magnified. This is inspired by the myth of Narcissus, who fell in love with his reflection in a pool of water. House of mirrors might feature such a "telescope", because it is basically a concave mirror, which would be a typical attraction at a funfair.
Gravitational Yes Refractor These can't be constructed on Earth[citation needed], they're formed naturally by large stars (particularly black holes) and galaxies. There are proposals to launch missions to the very far reaches of the Solar System to "construct" a Solar gravitational lens telescope, but the masses and distances involved are not compatible with consumer camera hardware. In the title text, Randall makes a pun on whether the listed focal length of a gravitational lens is measured in the comoving or proper reference frame, i.e. whether the expansion of the universe (between the place and time of the lens's creation or construction and Randall's decision to purchase) has been factored out or not. At the cosmological scales between stars and galaxies, where gravitational lensing is most relevant, this is a useful distinction to make, but stars are not for sale (by any legitimate commercial entity) and so nobody would be advertising any focal length in either reference frame for any purchaser.
Geological No Reflector This 'telescope' employs a single mirror to show the observer the 2003 movie "The Core". As a telescope it would not be useful, not least because it cannot be pointed at anything in the sky.

Transcript



      new topic.png  View comic discussion

New here?

Last 7 days (Top 10)

Lots of people contribute to make this wiki a success. Many of the recent contributors above have just joined. You can do it too! Create your account here.

You can read a brief introduction about this wiki at explain xkcd. Feel free to create an account and contribute to the wiki! We need explanations for xkcd comics, characters, What If? articles, and everything in between. If it is referenced in an xkcd comic, it should be here.

  • The incomplete explanations are listed here. Feel free to help out by expanding them!

Rules

Don't be a jerk!

There are a lot of comics that don't have set-in-stone explanations; feel free to put multiple interpretations in the wiki page for each comic.

If you want to talk about a specific comic, use its discussion page.

Please only submit material directly related to xkcd and, of course, only submit material that can legally be posted and freely edited. Off-topic or other inappropriate content is subject to removal or modification at admin discretion, and users who repeatedly post such content will be blocked.

If you need assistance from an admin, post a message to the Admin requests board.