Editing Talk:2240: Timeline of the Universe

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
 
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
  
−
"Cool Bug Epoch" reminds me of the last panel in [[1493]] and [[2191]], but it's probably coincidental.--[[User:GoldNinja|GoldNinja]] ([[User talk:GoldNinja|talk]]) 19:44, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
+
"Cool Bug Epoch" reminds me of the last panel in 1493 and 2191, but it's probably coincidental.--[[User:GoldNinja|GoldNinja]] ([[User talk:GoldNinja|talk]]) 19:44, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 
:Reminds me of [https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/455/655/ff5.png Cool Bug Fact's] [[User:DPS2004|DPS2004&#39;)&#59; DROP TABLE users&#59;--]] ([[User talk:DPS2004|talk]]) 20:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 
:Reminds me of [https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/455/655/ff5.png Cool Bug Fact's] [[User:DPS2004|DPS2004&#39;)&#59; DROP TABLE users&#59;--]] ([[User talk:DPS2004|talk]]) 20:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
−
::Yeah they are related the two comics, but not to this comic. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
  
 
"The title text is a mathematical joke, based on the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT)... Hence, technically, Randall is correct." that is assuming that the universe didn't start from anything bigger than this comic. ̶P̶h̶y̶s̶i̶c̶i̶a̶n̶s̶ Physicists, discuss! (okay, fine. philosophers can join too) [[User:OtterlyAmazin|OtterlyAmazin]] ([[User talk:OtterlyAmazin|talk]]) 20:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 
"The title text is a mathematical joke, based on the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT)... Hence, technically, Randall is correct." that is assuming that the universe didn't start from anything bigger than this comic. ̶P̶h̶y̶s̶i̶c̶i̶a̶n̶s̶ Physicists, discuss! (okay, fine. philosophers can join too) [[User:OtterlyAmazin|OtterlyAmazin]] ([[User talk:OtterlyAmazin|talk]]) 20:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 
:Even with antialiasing, the intrinsically granular nature of the graymap representing a sub-pixel measure, at any given perpendicular point of the scale at any given device's DPI.  I wouldn't put it past the Universe to have skipped-through the gap between values.  ...on the other hand, if we get into Big Rip territory, perhaps the effective DPI of any extant representation ''will'' pass back through a coincident value. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.202|162.158.34.202]] 22:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 
:Even with antialiasing, the intrinsically granular nature of the graymap representing a sub-pixel measure, at any given perpendicular point of the scale at any given device's DPI.  I wouldn't put it past the Universe to have skipped-through the gap between values.  ...on the other hand, if we get into Big Rip territory, perhaps the effective DPI of any extant representation ''will'' pass back through a coincident value. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.202|162.158.34.202]] 22:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
−
::The models predict the universe to be smaller than a grain of sand even after the inflation so of course the observable universe was at some point smaller than the line width of this drawing and so he is correct. There is no mathematical joke. Randall often jokes about not actual size, but notices that there one point on his graph will actually have been at the actual size. Which is impossible to say, but yes it was probably between inflation and Quark epoch. I have changed the explanation to cover this. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
  
 
I notice that the events along the top are mostly sensible, while the events at the bottom are mostly not. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.220|108.162.249.220]] 23:08, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 
I notice that the events along the top are mostly sensible, while the events at the bottom are mostly not. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.220|108.162.249.220]] 23:08, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
−
:Naah that is not so evident. Below there are three correct and 6 wrong and above it is 2 wrong vs 7 correct. So yes most of the incorrect is on the bottom side, but that seems more like a coincidence, since there are wrong and right on either side. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
  
 
It would be good if this clarified whether the diagram of the growth itself is correct and just badly mislabeled, or if it doesn't even correctly show the size of the universe over time. [[User:Gaelan|Gaelan]] ([[User talk:Gaelan|talk]]) 00:24, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
It would be good if this clarified whether the diagram of the growth itself is correct and just badly mislabeled, or if it doesn't even correctly show the size of the universe over time. [[User:Gaelan|Gaelan]] ([[User talk:Gaelan|talk]]) 00:24, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 +
 
:No, this is not the actual diagram, which is a much smoother regular bell shape without the sharp pointy left end.  We also don't really know anything about the starting point beyond wild conjecture, as there's lots of uncertainty in the cosmological model, no matter what anyone says. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 03:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
:No, this is not the actual diagram, which is a much smoother regular bell shape without the sharp pointy left end.  We also don't really know anything about the starting point beyond wild conjecture, as there's lots of uncertainty in the cosmological model, no matter what anyone says. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 03:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  
 
While the explanation mentions the dashed lines for the future fate of the universe, it only lists 3 possibilities, even though there are 4 sets of dashed lines in the diagram. It's possible that the outermost dashed lines represent another mistaken inflation button press. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 03:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
While the explanation mentions the dashed lines for the future fate of the universe, it only lists 3 possibilities, even though there are 4 sets of dashed lines in the diagram. It's possible that the outermost dashed lines represent another mistaken inflation button press. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 03:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
−
:Have added notice of all four lines to the explanation. Feel free to improve my version of the explanation on them. Agree that one of them could be the idea that the inflation switch was pushed again. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
Hey, methinks the title text maybe referring to the lesbegue measure(which for a point is zero) since we are talking about sizes.--[[User:Jassi101|Jassi101]] ([[User talk:Jassi101|talk]]) 08:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
−
:No need to invoke complicated math to state that when something expands from zero size to universe size then at some time it must take on any value in between, and thus also fit on this comics drawing. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)  <--- not true if you allow a couple expansions via the higher-order dimensions, then the universe pops back into 3-D with a zero-time-lag & thus a genuine discontinuity without even any Gibbs Overshoot.  [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 20:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 
  
−
The explanation of the title text is now long and complicated and, for me, hard to follow. Couldn't we just say something simple like this? "Randall's universe diagram is always at least one pixel thick. But the universe started much smaller than one pixel and expanded to the size it is today, so at some time instant it must have passed through the size of Randall's diagram -- making the diagram 'actual size' at that instant." Wouldn't something simple like this be better? I'd do this myself but I'm leery of deleting a lot of other people's writing. [[User:DKMell|DKMell]] ([[User talk:DKMell|talk]]) 20:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 
  
 
<!-- NOTICE: Click the [edit] button next to the Google Ads title to discuss the ads. -->
 
<!-- NOTICE: Click the [edit] button next to the Google Ads title to discuss the ads. -->
 
{{Talk:2220: Imagine Going Back in Time/Ads}}
 
{{Talk:2220: Imagine Going Back in Time/Ads}}

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page:

Retrieved from "https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Talk:2240:_Timeline_of_the_Universe"