1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby slinches » Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:33 am UTC

Image
Title text:
Spoiler:
Shoot for the Moon. If you miss, you'll end up co-orbiting the Sun alongside Earth, living out your days alone in the void within sight of the lush, welcoming home you left behind.


Meh, the moon is a bit far. Why don't I just shoot for my first comic thread?

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby rhomboidal » Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:34 am UTC

Yeah, shoot for the moon -- unless you're NASA in the last forty-plus years.

User avatar
BlitzGirl
Posts: 9100
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby BlitzGirl » Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:36 am UTC

slinches wrote:Meh, the moon is a bit far. Why don't I just shoot for my first comic thread?
You got it, Image !
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image<Profile
~.Image~.FAQ->Image

Mikeski
Posts: 1104
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Mikeski » Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:41 am UTC

If you miss, you'll end up co-orbiting the Sun alongside Earth, living out your days alone in the void within sight of the lush, welcoming home you left behind.

And if you hit... same thing, but more rocks.

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1035
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby slinches » Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:03 am UTC

Mikeski wrote:
If you miss, you'll end up co-orbiting the Sun alongside Earth, living out your days alone in the void within sight of the lush, welcoming home you left behind.

And if you hit... same thing, but more rocks.

I guess that depends on how fast you hit it. I doubt someone would have much time to ponder their predicament as they impact it at 0.99c. It would be fun to watch from Earth, though.

The same point applies to the title text. If you miss at greater than escape velocity from the solar system, Earth won't be visible for longc.


cRelatively speaking.

XiaoSiobhan
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:59 am UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby XiaoSiobhan » Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:06 am UTC

Shoot for the moon. Even if you don't reach escape velocity, you may have gotten high enough to fall back down as a shooting star.

User avatar
Deaths Proxy
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 2:42 am UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Deaths Proxy » Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:51 am UTC

Someone has been playing too much Kerbal Space Program.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 661
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby keithl » Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:59 am UTC

That's no moon.
deathstar100.jpg
deathstar100.jpg (6.48 KiB) Viewed 11187 times

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:01 am UTC

I tried not to make this, but it was too hard.
Image

redundant for attachment:
Spoiler:
shoot for the megan.png
I don't even.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

Kit.
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Kit. » Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:07 am UTC

Deaths Proxy wrote:Someone has been playing too much Kerbal spaaace Program.

Shouldn't we be replacing 'space' with 'spice'?

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 986
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby da Doctah » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:09 am UTC

slinches wrote:
Mikeski wrote:
If you miss, you'll end up co-orbiting the Sun alongside Earth, living out your days alone in the void within sight of the lush, welcoming home you left behind.

And if you hit... same thing, but more rocks.

I guess that depends on how fast you hit it. I doubt someone would have much time to ponder their predicament as they impact it at 0.99c. It would be fun to watch from Earth, though.

The same point applies to the title text. If you miss at greater than escape velocity from the solar system, Earth won't be visible for longc.


cRelatively speaking.


Depends on your vector. You could escape the Earth/Moon system but reduce your relative velocity around the Sun in such a way that your orbit will decay and you'll fall in.

User avatar
Icalasari
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 5:11 am UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Icalasari » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:18 am UTC

Shoot for the moon!

If you miss... Well, you won't exactly land amongst the stars. I mean, fuck, those distances between them are VAST! You're FAR more likely to shoot past them

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Klear » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:47 am UTC

Eternal Density wrote:I tried not to make this, but it was too hard.

Spoiler:
Image

redundant for attachment:
shoot for the megan.png


Now look what you did. You encouraged me!

Image

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Flumble » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:58 am UTC

da Doctah wrote:Depends on your vector. You could escape the Earth/Moon system but reduce your relative velocity around the Sun in such a way that your orbit will decay and you'll fall in.

Exactly; shoot for the moon during first quarter moon and you'll either reach it or become a sun god.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5582
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Nov 15, 2013 10:49 am UTC

My other idea was the death star but that's too obvious.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

User avatar
drachefly
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:25 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby drachefly » Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:30 pm UTC

If you miss, you'll have picked up 25 points. Make absolutely sure you get that last heart.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:05 pm UTC

A true story from my misspent youth (as opposed to my misspent adulthood...).

Shortly after a certain adaptive optics technique (guide star) got declassified, my company decided to make some tshirts (for our own use) with a stylized screen print of Starfire Optical Lab shooting a laser beam into space. (you can find this at, e.g. this page) . Someone decided to have a caption contest, so in my usual sardonic Muppet-Show-esque style, I suggested "Shoot for the Stars." To my great embarrassment, that was selected as the winning entry.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Djehutynakht » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:23 pm UTC

Heh. This was a good one. And the parodies.

This is gonna backfire though if they're all grammatical literalists and start shooting for the moon. Then she's screwed.

Snipeye
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:59 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Snipeye » Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:45 pm UTC

Copied from my own facebook rant several weeks ago:

There's a saying, "Shoot for the moon - even if you miss you'll land among the stars." From a scientific standpoint, I have many problems with this.

First and foremost, if you aimed for the moon, by the time you got to where you were aiming - be it in a rocket, or whatever vehicle - the moon would have long passed, and you would be left drifting among the stars. Unless, of course, you were traveling at roughly 225,000 MPH - faster than any manmade object has ever traveled, EVER, period. Even that figure is a best case.

So, let's revise the statement with what we now know: "Shoot for an area of space that is a calculated distance ahead of and directly in the trajectory of the moon - even if you miss you'll be left drifting among the stars."

Next I'd like to address the second part of that - "even if you miss you'll be left drifting among the stars." This, to me, seems quite inaccurate. As a most likely scenario, if you do, in fact, miss the moon, you're flat out screwed. Your rocket (or other method of transportation) will be left drifting in cold, silent, lonely, empty space until you die.

If we again revise the statement, we end up with "Shoot for an area of space that is a calculated distance ahead of and directly in the trajectory of the moon - if you miss, (and you probably will, based on the fact that your first idea was to shoot directly at the moon) you can likely expect to die of starvation, suffocation, or hypothermia. Your body will then drift through cold, silent, lonely, empty space for a period of time longer than you can possibly comprehend."

Of course, this is not quite as inspiring as the original statement, so let's assume a best case scenario: Your rocket (or other method of transportation) happened to be, but some statistic-defying miracle, a perfect trajectory to gravitationally slingshot around Venus - the nearest planet to earth. Of course, 'nearest' is still speaking on a literally astronomical scale. Venus is, in fact, roughly 23.6 million miles away - at best. So, if you traveled at the fastest any man-made object has ever traveled (HELIOS II, ~157,000mph, and it actually required a gravitation slingshot around the sun to do so) in the direction of the location of the gravity-well-rendezvous with Venus, then got accelerated perfectly so your trajectory was in line to land on the moon, you would still be traveling a MINIMUM of about a week -- only to then crash on the moon's surface and die. Alternatively, if you were aiming at the earth on your return voyage from good-guy-gravity-well Venus, you would burn up in the atmosphere.

Hm. This still isn't sounding as inspirational. If it's any consolation, discounting a gravitational slingshot, you likely will not have the required escape velocity to leave the solar system - meaning that sooner or later, the gravitational pull of the sun will pull you right back to it. You will, of course, be long dead by that point, but it's (maybe) comforting to think that your atoms will, at least, be a part of the life-giving star closest to earth - Sol.

If that star isn't good enough for you, expect a minimum travel time of 18,000 years - to put that in perspective, imagine living for 50 years. Then imagine that every single day of those 50 years was actually a year in and of itself. Then your (long-disintegrated) corpse and (maybe partially cohesive) rocket/vehicle will burn up in a star OTHER than Sol, you picky, stupid imbecile.

So, to sum it up:

"Shoot for an area of space that is a calculated distance ahead of and directly in the trajectory of the moon - if you miss, (and you probably will, based on the fact that your first idea was to shoot directly at the moon) you can likely expect to die of starvation, suffocation, or hypothermia. If, by some miracle, you return to some celestial body before your demise, the return to aforementioned celestial body will undoubtedly cause your demise, though it will be much more rapid. Assuming you aren't miraculously lucky, (and you probably aren't) your body will drift through cold, silent, lonely, empty space for a period of time longer than you can possibly comprehend, at the conclusion of which it will likely be rapidly disintegrated by a supermassive gravitational collection of hydrogen."

Or, if you really don't like that, "Don't aim for the moon," which, when worded explicitly rather than as an analogy, roughly means, "Your dreams will kill you."

Thank goodness for science.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:06 pm UTC

Snipeye wrote:Copied from my own facebook rant several weeks ago:
{snip}


On FB, rilly? And you didn't get a hundred "TL;DR" responses? :mrgreen:

also -- I see the mods are totally into the letter "a" now. As in s.p.a.c.e vs. spaaaaaaaaace.



And why not: Shoot for^H^H^H the Moon is perfectly reasonable, so long as you're playing Hearts. :oops:
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3082
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby orthogon » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:07 pm UTC

Snipeye wrote:.. Or, if you really don't like that, "Don't aim for the moon," which, when worded explicitly rather than as an analogy, roughly means, "Your dreams will kill you."

Or, to put it yet another way, "You will be going to space today. And not in a good way."

I, for one, welcome and embrace the word "skycircle", and hope we will send personned upgoers to more skycircles soon.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
BlitzGirl
Posts: 9100
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby BlitzGirl » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:11 pm UTC

Snipeye's rant is even better with space sprinkled in it. :D

@cellocgw: I always thought in Hearts it was Shoot the Moon (no "for").
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image<Profile
~.Image~.FAQ->Image

rmsgrey
Posts: 3634
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby rmsgrey » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:14 pm UTC

Any decent sniper knows you gotta lead your target when using a weapon with a non-quasi-infinite projectile velocity.

Meanwhile: Waltz For The Moon (YouTube)

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 834
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:15 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:I see the mods are totally into the letter "a" now. As in s.p.a.c.e vs. spaaaaaaaaace.

:shock: did you miss Great Lord Randalls instructions?

Mike Rore
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:18 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Mike Rore » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:22 pm UTC

Snipeye wrote:Copied from my own facebook rant several weeks ago:

blablablablabla

Thank goodness for science.


It almost sounds like you were trying to be funny.

speising
Posts: 2354
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby speising » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:28 pm UTC

isn't shooting only ballistic? i know jules verne did shoot a manned missile at the moon in a story, but generally, self-propelled vehicles are considered better for that purpose.
Last edited by speising on Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:30 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jc
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:48 pm UTC
Location: Waltham, Massachusetts, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby jc » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:29 pm UTC

Kit. wrote:
Deaths Proxy wrote:Someone has been playing too much Kerbal spaaace Program.

Shouldn't we be replacing 'spaaace' with 'spice'?

That might work, if you're a Brit. Or maybe Australian (Strine?). But it doesn't make much sense to us Murkins, or even to the Canadians among(st) us.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Klear » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:37 pm UTC

speising wrote:isn't shooting only ballistic?


People like you ought to be shot with laser.

chris857
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:04 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby chris857 » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:41 pm UTC

My Google-Fu seems seriously lacking at the moment (so I can't find the video I know exists), but someone made a rocket spear in KSP which glitched the Mun out of existence.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:14 pm UTC

BlitzGirl wrote:Snipeye's rant is even better with spaaace sprinkled in it. :D

@cellocgw: I always thought in Hearts it was Shoot the Moon (no "for").


yeah -- that's what the ^H^H^H thing is: it represents the 'delete' character uninterpreted. Stupid old joke from the pre-html days of the webz.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:17 pm UTC

speising wrote:isn't shooting only ballistic? i know jules verne did shoot a manned missile at the moon in a story, but generally, self-propelled vehicles are considered better for that purpose.


No. You can shoot a guided missile. See FOG-M for example.

The term "ballistic" is often used to describe any munition which has no guidance system, so even a missile with a rocket engine (but no course correction capability) is considered ballistic, even though only the post-thrust phase is technically ballistic.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

TimS
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:15 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby TimS » Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:34 pm UTC

She must be learning from Strax...
http://youtu.be/G17_B4uACgg?t=2m25s

Kit.
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Kit. » Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:20 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
speising wrote:isn't shooting only ballistic?


People like you ought to be shot with laser.

Image

User avatar
BlitzGirl
Posts: 9100
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby BlitzGirl » Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:23 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:
BlitzGirl wrote:Snipeye's rant is even better with spaaace sprinkled in it. :D

@cellocgw: I always thought in Hearts it was Shoot the Moon (no "for").

yeah -- that's what the ^H^H^H thing is: it represents the 'delete' character uninterpreted. Stupid old joke from the pre-html days of the webz.

Ah. I guess this is the part where I call you an old chirp and you tell me to get off your lawn.
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image<Profile
~.Image~.FAQ->Image

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3082
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby orthogon » Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:33 pm UTC

BlitzGirl wrote:
cellocgw wrote:
BlitzGirl wrote:Snipeye's rant is even better with spaaace sprinkled in it. :D

@cellocgw: I always thought in Hearts it was Shoot the Moon (no "for").

yeah -- that's what the ^H^H^H thing is: it represents the 'delete' character uninterpreted. Stupid old joke from the pre-html days of the webz.

Ah. I guess this is the part where I call you an old chirp and you tell me to get off your lawn.

Yes, you had to utter the incantation "stty erase ^H". Like the other magic words "ps aux" and "tar -cvzf" and of course "stty sane", nobody knows why they work or what they mean; they're just things we learned at our mothers' knees.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

project2051
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:20 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby project2051 » Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:37 pm UTC

Shouldn't the saying be updated to "Shoot for Mars."?

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3082
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby orthogon » Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:44 pm UTC

project2051 wrote:Shouldn't the saying be updated to "Shoot for Mars."?

No. I've heard War of the worlds. Those guys would shoot back.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Coyoty
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:56 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Coyoty » Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:01 pm UTC

Every time I shoot for the moon, some superhero or secret agent stops me. I'm only trying to save the world from werewolves. I think maybe they're working together to thwart me. Them and Batman. He likes to jump in front of the moon or pose the Batplane over it. He needs help. I'm just trying to destroy the moon as an intervention. And stop the werewolves.

EmptyTrash
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:56 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby EmptyTrash » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:24 pm UTC

Mouseover text is reminiscent of Doghousediaries number 5301.

(I'd'a posted a link, but that would be spam, apparently.)

Wumbo
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:10 pm UTC

Re: 1291: "Shoot for the Moon"

Postby Wumbo » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:36 pm UTC

Why does her beard part at her chin? Does that have a name?


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests