Page 266 of 2681

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:11 am UTC
by Davidy
bigcrag92 wrote:It dosen't take that long to re-read the pages you miss.

Actually, for those of us with actual lives, family and business matters to attend to on a regular basis, it takes more time than is reasonably available.

I suspect that there are some here that are devoting hours per day reading, analyzing and speculating about this comic. I don't have that luxury.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:30 am UTC
by thallone
One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:31 am UTC
by KarMann
thallone wrote:One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.

Really? How can you be so sure of that?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:47 am UTC
by dreiarmumig
Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:47 am UTC
by cmyk
KarMann wrote:
thallone wrote:One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.

Really? How can you be so sure of that?


The ability to draw in the foreground only exists in theory. Many artists have spent their lifetime trying to solve that problem, alas died always having to draw back-to-front. Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:50 am UTC
by cmyk
dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/


Damn, and here I thought I wasted way too much time on those damn animated gifs last night.

Cool though!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:57 am UTC
by Eshru
cmyk wrote:
KarMann wrote:
thallone wrote:One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.

Really? How can you be so sure of that?


The ability to draw in the foreground only exists in theory. Many artists have spent their lifetime trying to solve that problem, alas died always having to draw back-to-front. Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.

Relativistic speeds and cold fusion are equally impossible?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:59 am UTC
by KarMann
cmyk wrote:
KarMann wrote:
thallone wrote:One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.

Really? How can you be so sure of that?

The ability to draw in the foreground only exists in theory. Many artists have spent their lifetime trying to solve that problem, alas died always having to draw back-to-front. Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.

The same goes for the background just as much, though. That really doesn't narrow it down to "she never dug in front/always dug behind".

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:59 am UTC
by cmyk
I just crumbled Cueball. And the ocean too.

They're silicon based lifeforms!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:00 am UTC
by KarMann
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:01 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/


I swear the things this comic inspires people to make are amazing.

As for the poles, some kind of scaffolding seems likely at this point. They're going to be too widely spaced to be the masts of a ship, I think. Also most ships have 3 or fewer masts.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:02 am UTC
by Shepherdess
KarMann wrote:Image
Another pole. Not looking good for bannerites & volleyballers.


Still looking good for tetherball tourney, just sayin'.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:10 am UTC
by tman2nd
I'm still wondering what that white box is.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:12 am UTC
by Exodies
HAL9000 wrote:
partingLance wrote:
Elmach wrote:Do you seë the flyïng thïng?
It is there.
It is flying.
Whät cän it be other thän a fössilized semëncancërcöffeëbabië?


I saw several flying things, until I wiped off my monitor screen, whereupon I saw only one. Do you mean the thing she's throwing over her shoulder? She'd have to be pretty strong to through a babie of any kind over her shoulder so casual-like.

I don't know how many times I've thought something appeared in the air, only for it to be a speck on my screen. First time I've ever cleaned it.

Perhaps we should have a notice in the wiki - Clean your screen before watching. Every pixel counts.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:25 am UTC
by keithl
Away from the Time comic and forum for a few days, noticed the self-similar little sand castle on top of the middle sand castle, and the big poles.

I'm guessing the next images will zoom out - a lot - to show the current set of sand castles on top of a VERY BIG (sand?) castle. They keep referring to "the ocean" but the surface to the right stays still, and they disappear off frame for the swim (not actually shown), so perhaps the ocean is actually a few hundred feet down the side of the BIG castle.

This would also explain why Cueball appears to be "walking on water" compared to the slope of the "sand" in frame 176. Maybe that is just the solid surface on top of the big castle, not the water at all.

I haven't read the last few thousand forum posts - and with taxes and two conference abstracts to get ready before April 15, I won't - but I don't see the "scale up" variant of The End on the wikia list. Has this been discussed and ruled out by something I haven't noticed?

Thanks for keeping watch for me.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:26 am UTC
by cmyk
Eshru wrote:
cmyk wrote:
KarMann wrote:
thallone wrote:One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.

Really? How can you be so sure of that?


The ability to draw in the foreground only exists in theory. Many artists have spent their lifetime trying to solve that problem, alas died always having to draw back-to-front. Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.

Relativistic speeds and cold fusion are equally impossible?


In all seriousness... well, let's just say they both have plenty of theoretical physics, mathematics, thought and even a bit of research put into them (and experimentation even with CF), but it's currently agreed that both, to one degree or another, are enormous engineering/technology problems (i.e. Nature won't stop you if you can find a way to harness the energy of an entire star's lifetime to bend spacetime. But it'd love to see you try!) So, neither are necessarily impossible in our current understandings of the Standard Model and General Relativity, only ostensibly so technically infeasible, insurmountable, and/or they depend on new breakthroughs in fundamental physics, that if I were to make a bet, I'd put my money on the very distant future. Perhaps more so for traveling at, or very close, to c.

That said, you can't really compare the two in any meaningful way. Apples and oranges in physics and engineering. One is in the realm of General Relativity (gravity and the very big — astronomic — Traveling at c), the other in Quantum Mechanics (EM and the nuclear forces concerning the very small — subatomic — cold fusion). So far, these two pillars in fundamental physics have not been successfully/completely reconciled.

(I was j/k about foreground drawing, I hope that was obvious!)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:26 am UTC
by Exodies
dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/

That's the most useless waste of pixels I've ever seen.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:31 am UTC
by keithl
Eshru wrote:
cmyk wrote:Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.
Relativistic speeds and cold fusion are equally impossible?
Maybe, but relativistic fusion and cold speed are easy.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:32 am UTC
by KarMann
Exodies wrote:
dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/

That's the most useless waste of pixels I've ever seen.

Not sure if there's a level of sarcasm there, but in case you haven't gotten it going yet, make sure JavaScript is enabled, click the catapult, and drag. Everything else should click into place then.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:35 am UTC
by Elmach
keithl wrote:Away from the Time comic and forum for a few days, noticed the self-similar little sand castle on top of the middle sand castle, and the big poles.

I'm guessing the next images will zoom out - a lot - to show the current set of sand castles on top of a VERY BIG (sand?) castle. They keep referring to "the ocean" but the surface to the right stays still, and they disappear off frame for the swim (not actually shown), so perhaps the ocean is actually a few hundred feet down the side of the BIG castle.

This would also explain why Cueball appears to be "walking on water" compared to the slope of the "sand" in frame 176. Maybe that is just the solid surface on top of the big castle, not the water at all.

I haven't read the last few thousand forum posts - and with taxes and two conference abstracts to get ready before April 15, I won't - but I don't see the "scale up" variant of The End on the wikia list. Has this been discussed and ruled out by something I haven't noticed?

Thanks for keeping watch for me.

The right-ward surface does rise.

Slowly, it does, and yet it moves.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:43 am UTC
by Actaeus
keithl wrote:Away from the Time comic and forum for a few days, noticed the self-similar little sand castle on top of the middle sand castle, and the big poles.

I'm guessing the next images will zoom out - a lot - to show the current set of sand castles on top of a VERY BIG (sand?) castle. They keep referring to "the ocean" but the surface to the right stays still, and they disappear off frame for the swim (not actually shown), so perhaps the ocean is actually a few hundred feet down the side of the BIG castle.

This would also explain why Cueball appears to be "walking on water" compared to the slope of the "sand" in frame 176. Maybe that is just the solid surface on top of the big castle, not the water at all.

I haven't read the last few thousand forum posts - and with taxes and two conference abstracts to get ready before April 15, I won't - but I don't see the "scale up" variant of The End on the wikia list. Has this been discussed and ruled out by something I haven't noticed?

Thanks for keeping watch for me.


I think there's been some discussion of the Big Castle Theory. It hasn't been refuted, but seems to have little support at this stage.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:44 am UTC
by cmyk
I thinkhope Megan is building a timecube.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:45 am UTC
by Latent22
Do you know what I would put between those 4 poll's she is putting up. A giant 3D sand printer. That way they could automate the construction of the sand castle!

For this to work it would just need a motor at the base of each of the 4 polls the pulls the 4 wires attached to the sand print head that can be moved to nearly any position in 3D space inside the cube created by the polls. Fill the bucket above the print head with wet sand and have the hole at the bottom open and close on command.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:46 am UTC
by cmyk
keithl wrote:
Eshru wrote:
cmyk wrote:Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.
Relativistic speeds and cold fusion are equally impossible?
Maybe, but relativistic fusion and cold speed are easy.


By Gum! Get this man some research funding, stat!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:51 am UTC
by Exodies
KarMann wrote:
Exodies wrote:
dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/

That's the most useless waste of pixels I've ever seen.

Not sure if there's a level of sarcasm there, but in case you haven't gotten it going yet, make sure JavaScript is enabled, click the catapult, and drag. Everything else should click into place then.

I don't think it should be called sarcasm. It's the root of most of my humour - a blindingly obvious contradiction between what is and what I say about it. Having spent thousands of hours looking at and discussing The Castle it shows self un-awareness on a massive scale to dismiss the very same images in a different context. Well, it makes me laugh.

Thanks for TFM, I'll try to find a computer with a mouse.

Oh, and while I'm dictating - as we don't have free will, there's not going to be a problem with paradoxes. We'll just do whatever it takes to make the future turn out the way it did.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:04 am UTC
by KarMann
Image
Added: And yeah, there goes my Arecibo notion, too. :(

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:10 am UTC
by tman2nd
And the last one goes up.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:32 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
So, any guesses about how many frames we'll be watching Megan and Cueball pile up sand around their scaffold (if that is what it is)? I'm gonna go with around 243.

...Unless, Cueball is off getting a bulldozer. Then it could feasibly be as few as 37.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:55 am UTC
by higgs-boson
Charm Quark wrote:Greetings from the Large Hadron Collider! I have spend the majority of my 1*10^-15 newpix long lifespan lurking on this forum as I awaited the revelation of frame 430 (it sure was worth the wait!). I hope to become a valuable contributor to this forum before i inevitably decay into a variety of lighter particles, likely including a strange quark, gamma radia-


Thank ( God | Darkwing Duck | Helper )* I've already been around for a while.


*Helper, of course*.
*Did you expect any other?*
*Color coded foot notes are stupid.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:02 am UTC
by tman2nd
Image
Now that she has those poles up, does she need to add small poles to the model?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:10 am UTC
by RobIrr
Latent22 wrote:Do you know what I would put between those 4 poll's she is putting up. A giant 3D sand printer. That way they could automate the construction of the sand castle!

For this to work it would just need a motor at the base of each of the 4 polls the pulls the 4 wires attached to the sand print head that can be moved to nearly any position in 3D space inside the cube created by the polls. Fill the bucket above the print head with wet sand and have the hole at the bottom open and close on command.


I like the idea ... but... ever tried to get wet sand to flow through a hole at all? Maybe just use dry sand, with some sort of water spray to wet it once it's falling?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:11 am UTC
by higgs-boson
tman2nd wrote:http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/time/561a3d407ceaaa0e8aeecef27c16a10fbaa2e37bbe0528f3c46dc504d6036fd1.png
Now that she has those poles up, does she need to add small poles to the model?

I guess they do not consider poles, ropes, and the tiny box being part of the model.


I am Higgs-Boson and I approve this Comma.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:50 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
higgs-boson wrote:
tman2nd wrote:http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/time/561a3d407ceaaa0e8aeecef27c16a10fbaa2e37bbe0528f3c46dc504d6036fd1.png
Now that she has those poles up, does she need to add small poles to the model?

I guess they do not consider poles, ropes, and the tiny box being part of the model.


I am Higgs-Boson and I approve this Comma.


Maybe they forgot about the model and will update it later. Or it will be replaced by whatever the poles are for.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:00 am UTC
by KarMann
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:05 am UTC
by higgs-boson
We know of at least two issues - let's say: problems - they may have to deal with:
  • The river. No one supposed Arwen Undómiel playing a part in it (and with regret I do not expect the Evenstar doing so, too *sniff*), but the water level rises.
  • Structural limits not allowing to build le scénario des châteaux larger/taller/greater.

My tired brain cannot connect The Poles Rising to a solution to one of these problems. Yet.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:16 am UTC
by Flotter
higgs-boson wrote:We know of at least two issues - let's say: problems - they may have to deal with:
  • The river. No one supposed Arwen Undómiel playing a part in it (and with regret I do not expect the Evenstar doing so, too *sniff*), but the water level rises.
  • Structural limits not allowing to build le scénario des châteaux larger/taller/greater.

My tired brain cannot connect The Poles Rising to a solution to one of these problems. Yet.

The poles might be the base of some scaffolding, so they can build taller. But somehow I don't think that's what they are.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:17 am UTC
by gorn
cmyk wrote: Looks like she brought 4 poles. Looks like she plans on erecting them equidistant from each other.

Only if she builds a big mound for a central one.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:20 am UTC
by GerardE
higgs-boson wrote:We know of at least two issues - let's say: problems - they may have to deal with:
  • The river. No one supposed Arwen Undómiel playing a part in it (and with regret I do not expect the Evenstar doing so, too *sniff*), but the water level rises.
  • Structural limits not allowing to build le scénario des châteaux larger/taller/greater.

My tired brain cannot connect The Poles Rising to a solution to one of these problems. Yet.

I have seen a tallish building (20 floors) getting built 'top first': build top floor and roof (including inner walls, windows etc.), then hoist it up using 4 poles and build one underneath; repeat.
This may be tricky using wet sand, but hey, wait and see.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:20 am UTC
by Mr Moriaty
Morning all.
I see the Poles have invaded.

dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/



This is awesome... now if it could be combined with the funky recursion gifs from a couple of days ago we'd have a real screwed up game

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:26 am UTC
by azule
udscbt wrote:
Smithers wrote:Dear Cardinal Up Down Strange Charm Beauty Truth,
I noticed a while back that your sig was an image, instead of text. First I saw that the font was too small, but thought little of it. Then I realised that it had the wrong background colour when used in an odd-numbered reply and discovered that it was an image. Are you doing battle with the enemy that is the 300 character limit on sigs? Also, your image is in the PNG format, which supports (partial and full) transparency, so you could easily avoid the 'wrong colour' issue?

Yes, it's an image because there were too many characters for the signature. I haven't used a transparent background because... I actually didn't think about that, maybe I will change it one day, or maybe not.

When you change it, please shrink the width as it stretches out the page so that I have to scroll side-ways (the most sinful of all Internet sins). *angel*

cmyk wrote:
KarMann wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:That's weird. No change in action but a newpix? Time is in flux!

Someone should catalogue estimated time between each newpix based on what happened during that frame. Would be incredibly hard to guess for some, but for others it could be narrowed down within a few seconds.

Someone.

For the ones with trebuchet shot trajectories, should we assume G=9.80665 m/s2? Or do you suppose that's not safe here?


Well, it depends. You'd need to know the mass, the surface drag of the projectile, and how many foot pounds of torque the launching arm had at release. Only after the the ballistic projectile's kinetic energy it recieved from the trebuchet has been overcome by gravity (at the apogee of its trajectory), can you then figure out the elapsed estimated time using 9.8m/s2 (and to get really nitpicky, without knowing the density, mass or surface drag, we can't figure its terminal velocity), but I doubt there's enough trajectory data points across frames to calculate with any meaningful accuracy, especially with all the other unknowns. This is also assuming elapsed time overall has remained a constant, which doesn't seem to be the case.

Wouldn't anyone agree that with the 2 or 3 identical frames in a row that there is indeed a static fps? The speed could be construed from the trebuchet firings. I have always had a problem with the dialogue running all at once within a frame. It seems like if we get left-right head movements then each characters words should get their own frame. So, yep, the frame rate issue is sorta fucked up.

Mr Moriaty wrote:
dreiarmumig wrote:Having done a quick search, I didn't find that this has been posted on here before, so I thought I'd share it: http://thred.github.io/xkcd-time-catapult/


This is awesome... now if it could be combined with the funky recursion gifs from a couple of days ago we'd have a real screwed up game

Please don't suggest this. It will be done and our brains will be fried.