Editing Talk:1584: Moments of Inspiration

Umm, why is there a "citation needed" when stating that beaks are not a typical property of human children! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.220|162.158.34.220]] 10:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
: Did you click on the link in the citation needed? It's a joke [[User:Danish|Danish]] ([[User talk:Danish|talk]]) 14:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Needs to explain who Lise Meitner is - I'd never heard of her, she's not on a level with the others in public consciousness. {{unsigned ip|141.101.70.43}}
: Using Marie Skłodowska Curie (instead of Lise Meitner) would be more understandable - both of them made groundbreaking discoveries in radioactivity research and Ms Curie is definitely more famous than Ms Meitner. But the author probably did not want to join everyone else in using Ms Curie as "the only one token lady scientist" - as discussed in [[896: Marie Curie]], where Lise Meitner (as well as Emmy Noether) is mentioned.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.77|141.101.106.77]] 07:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Never let it be said that XKCD doesn't educate!  (I think it's a good thing to have used Lise as the example.  If everyone knows just about Marie Curie but few people know Lise Meitner, having read the comic they now know ''two'' influential women in physics, twice as many as before!  Compare and contrast others such as Florence Nightingale and Rosalind Franklin.  Ada Lovelace and Dame Stephanie 'Steve' Shirley.)  Also, can anyone think of an observation that Marie could have made that wasn't what she did anyway, i.e. the ability of an electrometer to measure radiation, or that pitchblende is more radioactive than uranium.
::: Reading the {{w|Steve_Shirley|wiki article about Dame Stephanie 'Steve' Shirley}}, I suspect that being woman in man-dominated field was her only notable accomplishment. Not comparable with {{w|Ada Lovelace|Augusta Ada King, Countess of Lovelace}}, who was at worst second programmer ever and discovered first computer bug. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 11:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Anyway, who do you think {{w|Meitnerium|element 109}} was named after? ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.188|141.101.98.188]] 10:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Does anyone know who "John and Mildred" might be?
--[[User:Lou Crazy|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy|talk]]) 09:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:May Mildred be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mildred_Lager Mildred Lager]? An "american pioneer of natural foods and health food", but there's no mention of "John" in this article. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.217|162.158.114.217]] 11:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

::I doubt it since Mildred Larger was born after Darwin's death.  I was wondering too who they might be, but I'm coming up empty. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 12:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to point out that Newton really was inspired by watching apple fall, that isn't a myth. The myth is that he was actually hit by the apple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton#Apple_incident [[User:KingSupernova|KingSupernova]] ([[User talk:KingSupernova|talk]]) 12:17, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

according to the german wikipedia, today's the tenth birthday of xkcd. i wonder if there's a connection between that and this strip's title... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.157|162.158.114.157]] 14:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

This comic seems to be about our desire to have neat stories that explain scientific discoveries. Each panel has an increasingly ridiculous story that explains a "Moment of Inspiration".  [[User:Bartash|Bartash]] ([[User talk:Bartash|talk]]) 16:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

The phrase "Hey Lise" seems like a possible Simpsons reference? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.239|141.101.98.239]] 18:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:Since she is called {{w|Lisa Simpson}} not Lise, and since Meitner is called Lise I do not see this at all...--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

This comic may or may not be inspired by SMBC http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2353 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.42|162.158.93.42]] 19:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)


The explanation says Darwin had understood Mendel's work on genetics. I understand that there is no evidence he read Mendel's work, or understood the implications it had for the theory of evolution. I know some have claimed he had some version of Mendel's work in his papers when he died, but this appears to be disputed and I have never seen any evidence. Considering the profound implications Medelian inheritance would have on the theory I'd  have thought Darwin would have mentioned it if he was aware...[[User:Magdalen|Magdalen]] ([[User talk:Magdalen|talk]]) 19:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Reference for the Darwin Mendel situation: http://members.shaw.ca/mcfetridge/darwin.html [[User:Magdalen|Magdalen]] ([[User talk:Magdalen|talk]]) 19:41, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Yes I agree that this is also what can be read on the wiki page for Mendel (at the bottom of this paragraph on {{w|Gregor_Mendel#Experiments_on_plant_hybridization}}. I will alter the explanation. But it is though correct that he worried about inbreeding according to the page on Darwins children. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 18:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

This was confusing because I know too much history of science. The Darwin family's fortune came from the porcelain business--both Charles and his wife Emma were descendants of the famous Wedgewood family. Having porcelain mentioned in the Meitner panel but not the Darwin panel threw me off. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 12:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)