explain xkcd:Sandbox
Welcome to the explain xkcd wiki!
We have an explanation for all 3257 xkcd comics, and only 45 (1.4%) are incomplete. Help us finish them!
Latest comic
| 182.8 Meters |
Title text: They rounded down to 182.8 instead of rounding up to 182.9 because 182.9 might make the statement incorrect. |
Explanation
| This is incomplete: This page was created recently by a 1.8288 meter high individual. Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page! |
This is a comic in the My Hobby series — the hobby here being reverse-engineering original units from oddly specific measurements in another unit. Unlike many of the My Hobby comics, where Cueball's hobby is something eccentric, prankish or dangerous, in this situation he uses his hobby simply to understand the origin of someone else's unusual phrasing.
When presenting measurements where perfect accuracy is not required, such as in casual conversation or when giving simple presentations to the public, speakers will often use approximations, such as rounding to the nearest whole number, or the nearest ten, or using only the most significant digit. When translating these approximations into other measurement systems, however, people will often treat them as precise, and use the standard conversion formulae to get an exact value. This leads to examples of false precision, where the presentation of a measurement implies more information than is actually contained in it. In this case, a fathom is a unit of measurement used to measure how deep water is. One fathom is equal to six feet, or 1.8288 metres. The depth of the bay has been measured as being greater than 100 fathoms, and someone has converted that (via the value 182.88) to 182.8 meters.
In most cases, 182.88 would round to 182.9. As the title text explains, in this case they rounded down in order to prevent a possibly incorrect statement. This is a comical attempt at mitigating the false precision; it retains the overly-precise initial statement (of unknown precision or accuracy, having just one obviously significant figure) was too approximate to imply. It suggests that they were worried that the maximum depth may be between 182.88 meters and 182.9 meters — a margin of just 2 centimeters, which is beyond the accuracy/precision with which anyone is likely to be measuring such things. Moreover, in most areas of seawater it would be within the daily variance due to tidal activity (requiring reference to a specific choice of tidal datum), and the seabed is typically a dynamic environment in which the depth profile could be changing by this much over very short periods through the redistribution of sediment from both tides and weather-induced events. A more reasonable attempt to translate 'the bay is more than 100 fathoms deep' might be "the bay is more than 180 meters deep"; this stays close to the initial measurement while rounding to the nearest ten, to convey that the measure is approximate.
Assuming that the original "100 fathoms" was itself a rounding of the measurement (or even just a vague 'best estimate') to the nearest ten (i.e. above 95 fathoms but no higher than 105 fathoms), the precisely converted limits would have been 18.288 meters apart, which might have been better converted to a ±10 meter 'tolerance'; slightly more 'flexible' than the original assumption, but at no risk of being incorrectly exact about an inherently inexact fact. Although even that may be wrong, if the rounding to 100 was instead to the nearest twenty or even one hundred fathoms. The value could have been rounded to just a single figure of accuracy, and without further information it is impossible to rule that out; it was in order to avoid this very misunderstanding that one of the first accurate measurements of Mount Everest was subtly adjusted to not appear to be an approximate value.
False precision may also sometimes be used in product labelling to present things as "more than a" precise number, to make the product sound more enticing, cheap or worthwhile (for example, saying "now with more than 28.4% more water", when the product only has 28.5% more water). That also relates to the confusion between "five times more than" and "five times as much as", which some people use synonymously creating a potential off-by-one error.
Randall has previously used conversion between measurement systems as main subject of his comics, including using the overly exact conversion and re-rounding of values, which also involved fathoms.
Transcript
- [Hairbun stands at a podium to the left, gesturing toward a sign, with an oval (likely representing the bay) and some illegible text on it. Four visitors stand nearby observing: Ponytail, Cueball, Megan, and White Hat (in that order). Cueball has a thought bubble.]
- Hairbun: In some places, the bay is more than 182.8 meters deep.
- Cueball: (thinking) "More than"? Why would they use that for such a precise...
- Cueball: (thinking) ...Aha! 100 fathoms!
- [Caption below the panel:]
- My Hobby: Reverse-engineering original units
Discussion
Make changes, try things out, or just have fun with the wiki here! Just leave everything above the line alone, please.
This is a test. PoolloverNathan[stalk the blue seas] 20:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- This is not. —While False (museum | talk | contributions | logs | rights | printable version | page information | what links there | related changes | Google search | current time: 20:05) 18:38, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- A foreign student asked me to help fight against his math teacher. That was unusual. He was in that class for just a couple of weeks. The teacher's phone number was sent to me. The student asked me to spam-call the teacher. 172.71.155.55 22:58, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
here i'm just messing around in html, ignore this
furhhfghure guyrburgryhuyvfr "rvhru"
interesting way of writing quotations xd
- hmmm this one of putting "<p>" in a line break will come in handy for when i want it to start at the same place than the first line
edit: da hek did that "</div>" come from An user who has no account yet (talk) 14:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
hi uh its hard to get here.
is this a reference to undocumented feature??? hmm... this is interesting.
108.162.241.216 02:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
yum yum [citation needed]
Hiuiedeixgeyceiyedhcdiedcve {{trout}}
This is the leaderboard:<a href=" [AT THE JULY 28TH MEETING][tab] "Cancel the meeting! Our cover is blown."> More testing: hello doesthiswork (yesitdoes) This isn't a good name (talk) 22:44, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
hi 164.58.172.158 14:21, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
What is this?????????????????????? King Pando (talk) 04:25, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Hello 107.1.219.44 19:29, 29 April 2026 (UTC)New here?
Last 30 days (Top 10) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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.
- If you're new to wiki editing, see the explain xkcd:Editor FAQ for a specific guidance to this wiki and the more general help on how to edit wiki pages. There's also a handy wikicode cheatsheet.
- Discussion about the wiki itself happens at the Community portal.
- You can browse the comics from the list of all comics or by navigating the category tree at Category:Comics.
- 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.
