0812: "Glass"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
jc
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:48 pm UTC
Location: Waltham, Massachusetts, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby jc » Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:00 pm UTC

So in the last frame, the guy picks up the glass, which seems intact. There's a little pile of stuff left behind on the table, where the glass was in the previous frames? It probably signifies something, but I can't think of anything relevant to the comic. Anyone know what it's supposed to be?

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby SirMustapha » Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:35 pm UTC

Physics is angry with the two folks because "we" are trying to find the Higgs Boson... I mean, is that the joke?

That doesn't really have any humour or many any sense, not even in Randall's own terms.

User avatar
uncivlengr
Posts: 1202
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 10:35 pm UTC
Location: N 49°19.01 W 123°04.41

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby uncivlengr » Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:56 pm UTC

If you're going to have your characters conversing with an anthropomorphism that's governing/tampering with the laws of physics, why not just call it God? Who the heck is going to make a plea to "physics" to stop ruining their experiements?
I don't know what to do for you

kingworks
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:23 pm UTC
Location: Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby kingworks » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:00 pm UTC

Just because the girl said "Okay Physics. . . " why can't the disembodied voice be God? Isn't the Higgs-Boson supposed to be the "God particle?"

Also

"I read in this one article that the breaking of electroweak symmetry is the reason we have SOULS . . ."


Is this a real thing that exists? Possibly on the internet?

User avatar
Yurgen
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:41 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Yurgen » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:07 pm UTC

Ghavrel wrote:There's certainly more emphasis placed on analyzing the credibility of one's sources... but how exactly do airplanes stay up? :P .


Powered flight is an engineering problem. It's far too practical for physicists.

NotAllThere
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 12:54 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby NotAllThere » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:10 pm UTC

uncivlengr wrote:If you're going to have your characters conversing with an anthropomorphism that's governing/tampering with the laws of physics, why not just call it God? Who the heck is going to make a plea to "physics" to stop ruining their experiements?


Because anthromorphic personifications per se, are most certainly not God. Some anthromorphic personifications might be gods, and one of those might be God, but just because you've got an anthropomorphic personification, it's doesn't mean that it is God - or even a god.

Now, any anthromorphic personification of Physics will be be working for Maths. So definitely not God as in "the supreme being ruler over all" kind of sense we normally refer to as "God". Though Maths might be.

I wonder if this is the article.

The probability that your soul and spirit transitions to another set of numbers; is because of meta-mathematics and fractal numbers. Using fractal numbers is at least some of the electroweak force set of existence. Then you would not have to worry about decomposition of your body. Your soul and spirit would exist in the electroweak range of existence. Then you could use the set of real numbers for transmigration.
yangosplat wrote:So many amazing quotes, so little room in 300 characters!

webgiant
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:36 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby webgiant » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:31 pm UTC

hrasdt wrote:Would it be more disturbing if they were actually intending for the water to change to blood, or if "Physics" just made it happen out of mischief?


"Black Hat Guy" wasn't in the comic, so it's a safe bet blood wasn't the intention.

Gamer_2k4
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:09 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Gamer_2k4 » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:50 pm UTC

±EDy wrote:
Gamer_2k4 wrote:
Ghavrel wrote:I started having trouble trusting PhDs when I started going to college. Probably a liberal arts thing.

It depends on the discipline. In physics and chemistry, they know what they are talking about. Some of the humanities, they're making stuff up

I'd say whatever the discipline, some Grads do know what they are doing... and if they are intelligent, they will know why. I would add thought that most don't, and graduate by their shear perseverence and the pity of their supervisor.

-----------------
Edit: Contextualized the quote


Whoa, whoa, whoa. Get your citations right. I didn't say that.

brood wrote:the ledger lines on the music notes bug me. I get why they're there, but it still looks pretty awkward.


You get why they're there? Why are they there? A line indicates absolutely nothing about a note except where it is in relation to other notes (which there aren't any). And if you say, "There's the other half note," well, there SHOULDN'T be, because they're representing one continuous sound. It's just an unnecessary visual distraction.

Shambolic
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:30 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Shambolic » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:49 pm UTC

Singulaire wrote:Then Physics throws us a curveball- Quantum Mechanics. It's her friggin' Magnum Opus, filled with things like reality being dependent on observation, temporary violation of the principles of conservation and instantaneous transmission of information.


Except that it isn't full of any of those things. It is very widely misunderstood though...

avocadohead
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby avocadohead » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:49 pm UTC

Finally, a physicist soprano!
...assuming the resonance frequency of the standard wine glass here. Why is she vocalising on "eee", though? "aaaaa" would be much more effective in terms of sound pressure.
Finally, PhDs are sneaky, untrustworthy bastards. Surely, everybody knows that.

srr
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:50 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby srr » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:58 pm UTC

brood wrote:the ledger lines on the music notes bug me. I get why they're there, but it still looks pretty awkward.

Has the graphic been edited? hmph, it'd be more intelligible with them in as I didn't even notice the note on first (and second) look. Ah - and the stem should be downward rather than up, I suppose.

Oddly as it stands now I read it as a C. Despite it having no context. Go go gadget conditioning! (isolated note with line through and stem upward = plays automatically in my aural system as a C, although I 'hear' a C5 WHICH DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE)

srr
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:50 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby srr » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:00 pm UTC

"I read in this one article that the breaking of electroweak symmetry is the reason we have SOULS . . ."


Is this a real thing that exists? Possibly on the internet?[/quote]

I want to know this too!

rpresser
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:49 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby rpresser » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:21 pm UTC

NotAllThere wrote:I wonder if this is the article.

The probability that your soul and spirit transitions to another set of numbers; is because of meta-mathematics and fractal numbers. Using fractal numbers is at least some of the electroweak force set of existence. Then you would not have to worry about decomposition of your body. Your soul and spirit would exist in the electroweak range of existence. Then you could use the set of real numbers for transmigration.

It has to be. It's the number one link for Googling "electroweak souls".

And even in the first paragraph that hits your eyes, there are things that make your head asplode.

The probability of some afterlife set theories ranges from negative infinity to positive infinity for at least some varieties of significances. One probability of afterlife existence equivalent to life is 10,000/(transfinite number – 10,000) to Alef12/(transfinite number – Alef12) because of individually known factors. Such math is also equivalent for adepts.

What the heck is an "afterlife set theory"? Isn't a probability limited to the range (0,1)? What's a "variety of significance"?

Practiced number mechanics of the soul could let you traverse the number realm to the heart of the spirit. The number probabilities of the number mechanics of the soul depends on how good probably your pineal gland can count and process numbers. Practice chakra balancing and potentiating of your pineal gland. Practice until your pineal gland is potentiated. Practice counting numbers until you can count transfinite numbers. Try to figure out some sort of prayer mechanics that lets you communicate with the celestially angelic.

Ooohhh, boy. You let me know how that works out for you. "Count transfinite numbers". Suuuure.

cameroda
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:29 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby cameroda » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:32 pm UTC

avocadohead wrote:Finally, a physicist soprano!
...assuming the resonance frequency of the standard wine glass here. Why is she vocalising on "eee", though? "aaaaa" would be much more effective in terms of sound pressure.
Finally, PhDs are sneaky, untrustworthy bastards. Surely, everybody knows that.


At least for me, It is easier to hit high notes on an eeee :) than an aaaa :o - the shape of the throat on aaaa is pretty open and makes it tricky to vocalize and sustain in the highest part of my range.

Agree that the ledger lines look out of place.

Faranya
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:10 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Faranya » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:47 pm UTC

katrmr wrote:@black_hat_guy: can you really be sure that a chair, when you turn your back to it, doesn't transform into a rabbit?

Yes, as my lettuce remains uneaten. Unless of course my lettuce becomes a chair while I'm not looking...
Image

Captain Chaos
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:12 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Captain Chaos » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:53 pm UTC

TurtleMidget wrote:Why is the girl in the last panel speaking to the back of the guy's head?
Edit: Unless she's actually targeting her remark towards the "Physics" entity, which I had assumed to be unknown until after she spoke.

Not everything in the panel happens at the same time. First she makes her remark in jest, not expecting physics to actually respond. Then physics answers, causing the guy to look towards the sound.

Captain Chaos
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:12 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Captain Chaos » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:56 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:Physics is angry with the two folks because "we" are trying to find the Higgs Boson... I mean, is that the joke?

That doesn't really have any humour or many any sense, not even in Randall's own terms.

Sure it does, it's just absurd humour. The kind I like the best. Like that old joke I have on one of my T-shirts: "2 + 2 = 5, for extremely large values of 2". Or any Monty Python sketch. :)

rcr
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:49 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby rcr » Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:11 pm UTC

For one the theory about breaking a glass with your voice is not about pressure but about matching a frequency which is supposed to shatter the glass and generally we assume that pitch to be most easily reached using the highest pitch syllable we can make and that is normally an "eeeeee".

The ledger notes probably don't have any significance to anything besides themselves because ledger notes are supposed to be a reference point between two notes not on the bar. All the ledger notes tell us is that both the half notes are the same note.

As for knowing it's wine. He probably thought 'No point letting a perfectly good glass of wine go to waste.' and tried to drink it until his nose caught a wiff of it and decided it was blood.

The fact that she addresses physics isn't to say she knows it is cognitively present (it's omnipresent as far as we know) but suggests that she's making an expression of semi-irritation with the laws of physics as she knows them. I know that I do this sort of thing when I'm irritated with a subject, but normally I'm alone when I do so because it is a bit loony. The joke is more about the fact that physics responded and had the capacity to do so rather than the idea of physics simply being angry which physicists for their extent of research. Of course I'm being a bit pushy with my opinion so if you don't like that or find it funny feel free to take your own punch line and ignore mine. After all that is the purpose of humor right? To find your own source of enjoyment and potentially thought from some form of content.

Finally regarding the subjective reality based on our observation I have to say that in all practicality (which may be lacking here) my concern for what my chair does on its holiday away from my butt is very minimal so long as it isn't outside getting run over by cars it can be a rabbit and can still return to where I last observed it before I observe it again.

inon
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:29 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby inon » Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:34 pm UTC

"I read in this one article that the breaking of electroweak symmetry is the reason we have SOULS. This guy with a degree said so!"


that would be that bloody Roger Penrose, then. Or was his version: "quantum gravity is the reason we have MINDS". Whatever. The guy is meant to be smart. That book ruined Penrose triangles for me.

User avatar
mister k
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:28 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby mister k » Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:48 pm UTC

right. So the joke is that two people are attempting to shatter glass. This fails, but it turns into wine. The two people, rather than being astonished at having been involved in an act of alchemy, remain calm and determine that it is blood. Rather than freaking out, they make a jokey comment about physics messing with them, and then someone (physics/god) tells them to stop searching for the higgs boson. So these guys were physicists? Why were they trying to break that glass then? Surely they'd already covered harmonic frequencies long ago, and has some work to be getting on. And if physics/god wanted them to stop, why did he target this harmless experiment, rather than, you know, CERN? What?

Captain Chaos wrote:
SirMustapha wrote:Physics is angry with the two folks because "we" are trying to find the Higgs Boson... I mean, is that the joke?

That doesn't really have any humour or many any sense, not even in Randall's own terms.

Sure it does, it's just absurd humour. The kind I like the best. Like that old joke I have on one of my T-shirts: "2 + 2 = 5, for extremely large values of 2". Or any Monty Python sketch. :)


No, absurd humour... no. Srsly, if you think this is good absurdist humour (or the 2+2=5 joke, which is about as funny as mildew) then you need to watch more monty python. Or read this
Elvish Pillager wrote:you're basically a daytime-miller: you always come up as guilty to scumdar.

avocadohead
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby avocadohead » Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:58 pm UTC

cameroda wrote:At least for me, It is easier to hit high notes on an eeee :) than an aaaa :o - the shape of the throat on aaaa is pretty open and makes it tricky to vocalize and sustain in the highest part of my range.

Well, all singers have their own favourite vowels... Anyway, in the high soprano register, all vowels tend to come out as 'a' because of the fewer available resonances (see this Nature paper from some guys down under: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/reprints/SopranoNat.pdf), so people tend to just ride with it and sing an open-mouthed "a" anyway to increase sound pressure (e.g. making a "mutton's salute" - "Gruss vom Hammel" - out of a heavenly salute, "Gruss vom Himmel"). Still, according to youtube, standard wineglasses seem to shatter around 500-700 Hz (C5-F5), which isn't even that high.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:05 pm UTC

mister k wrote:
Captain Chaos wrote:Sure it does, it's just absurd humour. The kind I like the best. Like that old joke I have on one of my T-shirts: "2 + 2 = 5, for extremely large values of 2". Or any Monty Python sketch. :)


No, absurd humour... no. Srsly, if you think this is good absurdist humour (or the 2+2=5 joke, which is about as funny as mildew) then you need to watch more monty python. Or read this

I actually think the 2+2=5 joke is funny, if understood in the context of measured quantities. For quantities measured to one significant figure as "2", with a true value between 2.2500_ and 2.499_, the true value of their sum is between 4.500_ and 4.99_, which measured to one significant figure is "5". So two sufficiently large values each measured as "2" may have a sum measured as "5", or "2 + 2 = 5, for sufficiently large values of 2". Which sounds absurd yet is true, and thus provides humor for those who get why and how it is true.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:14 pm UTC

The probability that your soul and spirit transitions to another set of numbers; is because of meta-mathematics and fractal numbers. Using fractal numbers is at least some of the electroweak force set of existence. Then you would not have to worry about decomposition of your body. Your soul and spirit would exist in the electroweak range of existence. Then you could use the set of real numbers for transmigration.

...

The probability of some afterlife set theories ranges from negative infinity to positive infinity for at least some varieties of significances. One probability of afterlife existence equivalent to life is 10,000/(transfinite number – 10,000) to Alef12/(transfinite number – Alef12) because of individually known factors. Such math is also equivalent for adepts.

...

Practiced number mechanics of the soul could let you traverse the number realm to the heart of the spirit. The number probabilities of the number mechanics of the soul depends on how good probably your pineal gland can count and process numbers. Practice chakra balancing and potentiating of your pineal gland. Practice until your pineal gland is potentiated. Practice counting numbers until you can count transfinite numbers. Try to figure out some sort of prayer mechanics that lets you communicate with the celestially angelic.

Alright Pythagoras, I think you've had quite enough for tonight...
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

Gamer_2k4
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:09 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Gamer_2k4 » Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:58 pm UTC

Man, it's a good thing that "electroweak soul" business was written by someone doing the HARD sciences. Otherwise I might doubt their credibility!

Singulaire
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 10:05 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Singulaire » Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:18 pm UTC

Shambolic wrote:
Singulaire wrote:Then Physics throws us a curveball- Quantum Mechanics. It's her friggin' Magnum Opus, filled with things like reality being dependent on observation, temporary violation of the principles of conservation and instantaneous transmission of information.


Except that it isn't full of any of those things. It is very widely misunderstood though...



So you're saying that the double slit experiment, quantum tunneling and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox didn't happen?

User avatar
bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby bmonk » Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:35 pm UTC

katrmr wrote:Do I understand right that a 'degree' is a PhD? After reading "4 Hour Workweek", you'll have trouble trusting PhD's. Cause it's now just a marketing thing.

Likely a PhD. According to many thesis directors, a PhD is worth an average of 2 fewer footnotes per page.
brood wrote:the ledger lines on the music notes bug me. I get why they're there, but it still looks pretty awkward.

When I got to this one, I went back up and looked. Now they bug me--with them there, they indicate that she is singing below the staff, which makes her an alto. And it's an odd note to try to shatter a glass anyway. (Were she singing a high, piercing note, the stem would go down, not up.)
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

nekomata
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:43 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby nekomata » Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:03 pm UTC

webgiant wrote:
hrasdt wrote:Would it be more disturbing if they were actually intending for the water to change to blood, or if "Physics" just made it happen out of mischief?


"Black Hat Guy" wasn't in the comic, so it's a safe bet blood wasn't the intention.

Considering the outcome, it could be argued that Black Hat Guy is god however 8)

asdfzxc
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 7:04 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby asdfzxc » Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:43 pm UTC

nekomata wrote:
webgiant wrote:
hrasdt wrote:Would it be more disturbing if they were actually intending for the water to change to blood, or if "Physics" just made it happen out of mischief?


"Black Hat Guy" wasn't in the comic, so it's a safe bet blood wasn't the intention.

Considering the outcome, it could be argued that Black Hat Guy is god however 8)

You know, that would actually explain a lot of things

Shishire
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:33 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Shishire » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:21 am UTC

NotAllThere wrote:I did read a short science-fiction story where the laws of science were ill-defined, until repeated experiment fixed the results. Can't remember who it is by, or what it was called. If only there was a world-wide communication network/information repository I could search to find out. :?


I vaguely remember that too, but I can't for the life of me remember what it is. On the other hand, Terry Pratchett's Discworld has the computer Hex which does stupidly complex calculations by doing many impossible things very quickly, before the Universe can catch on to the fact that it was impossible, and then make it so. But... Discworld obeys laws of narrative rather than physics (where else is the speed of light slowed by the presence of a dense magical field?), so "impossible" doesn't really cut it.

User avatar
jc
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 5:48 pm UTC
Location: Waltham, Massachusetts, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby jc » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:00 am UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:
mister k wrote:
Captain Chaos wrote:Sure it does, it's just absurd humour. The kind I like the best. Like that old joke I have on one of my T-shirts: "2 + 2 = 5, for extremely large values of 2". Or any Monty Python sketch. :)
No, absurd humour... no. Srsly, if you think this is good absurdist humour (or the 2+2=5 joke, which is about as funny as mildew) then you need to watch more monty python. Or read this
I actually think the 2+2=5 joke is funny, ...

I like it, too, though I'd pick one of the other explanations. The first time I ran across it, it instantly reminded me of a case in which a member of a team of us computer/math/engineering types made a joke in a meeting to the effect that what management was asking would have to wait for the next upgrade to the speed of light. We found that we had several managers who seriously thought that the speed of light had been set by an international standards committee (which is why it's the same everywhere in the world). To them, the attempted joke was accepted a fact that explained why we had to put off the new "requirement" for a while, until the speed of light could be increased. Probably in a year or two, rather than the weeks that they'd expected.

Under this interpretation, "2 + 2 = 5" probably does qualify as "absurdist" humor. It's also a sort of satire, if it's meant to mock the level of understanding that's typical in much of upper management, whose degree programs rarely include any courses with with actual scientific content.

I wonder how many distinct interpretations there might be that make "2 + 2 = 5" an actual joke? I've seen a couple of others, but the margin here isn't wide enough to hold them all ...

Simplex
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:08 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Simplex » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:30 am UTC

Shishire wrote:
NotAllThere wrote: (where else is the speed of light slowed by the presence of a dense magical field?)


http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&q=vestergaard+bose+einstein+condensates+light+speed

:wink:

I blame a Wizard for those magical fields.

User avatar
Tyrannosaur
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 5:39 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Tyrannosaur » Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:01 am UTC

kingworks wrote:Just because the girl said "Okay Physics. . . " why can't the disembodied voice be God? Isn't the Higgs-Boson supposed to be the "God particle?"


It is. But physicists wouldn't try to talk to God, would they? They'd talk to "physics"

But it might also be because as I study deeper and deeper physics, things get stranger and stranger.... I thought that's what Randal was making fun of here.

and who says phd's don't know anything?!?!?! http://xkcd.com/617/
djessop wrote:The t-shirt should read "There are 11 types of people in the world, those who understand binary, those who don't and those who insist the number above is pronounced as eleven no matter what base you're in".

User avatar
from canada
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:05 am UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby from canada » Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:22 am UTC

So in today's xkcd, randall effectively says nothing with a hell of a lot of text and squiggly lines

rpresser
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:49 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby rpresser » Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:36 am UTC

Shishire wrote:
NotAllThere wrote:I did read a short science-fiction story where the laws of science were ill-defined, until repeated experiment fixed the results. Can't remember who it is by, or what it was called. If only there was a world-wide communication network/information repository I could search to find out. :?


I vaguely remember that too, but I can't for the life of me remember what it is. On the other hand, Terry Pratchett's Discworld has the computer Hex which does stupidly complex calculations by doing many impossible things very quickly, before the Universe can catch on to the fact that it was impossible, and then make it so. But... Discworld obeys laws of narrative rather than physics (where else is the speed of light slowed by the presence of a dense magical field?), so "impossible" doesn't really cut it.


The story you're thinking of is "Waldo", by Robert Heinlein.

Heinlein wrote:Suppose Chaos were king and the order we thought we detected in theworld about us a mere phantasm of the imagination; where would that lead us? In that case, Waldo decided, it was entirely possible that a ten-pound weight did fall ten times as fast as a one-pound weight until the day the audacious Galileo decided in his mind that it was not so.

Perhaps the whole meticulous science of ballistics derived from the convictions of a few firm-minded individuals who had sold the notion to the world. Perhaps the very stars were held firm in their courses by the unvarying faith of the astronomers. Orderly Cosmos, created out of Chaos - by Mind!

The world was flat before geographers decided to think of it otherwise.

The world was flat, and the Sun, tub size, rose in the east and set in the west. The stars were little lights, studding a pellucid dome which barely cleared the tallest mountains. Storms were the wrath of gods and had nothing to do with the calculus of air masses. A Mind-created animism dominated the world then.

User avatar
BlueNight
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:59 am UTC
Location: Albuquerque
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby BlueNight » Sat Oct 30, 2010 5:23 am UTC

black_hat_guy wrote:
webgiant wrote:I've always thought of physics as quite stupid: you can't convince it to do anything differently from the way it has always done things, no matter how you try. And it claims all the "new discoveries" are really stuff physics has been doing all along, we just haven't noticed physics doing them.
You're right, it's possible that stuff started happening after we noticed it (let's keep quantum mechanics out of this), but it's not very likely and doesn't make sense.

But is it testable? You don't know how probable it is until it's testable; you only think you know because your philosophy of science says so.

(Not that I'm advocating the myth of magic disappearing as science started, I'm just pointing out something factual.)
---------
BlueNight

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Pfhorrest » Sat Oct 30, 2010 8:23 am UTC

BlueNight wrote:
black_hat_guy wrote:You're right, it's possible that stuff started happening after we noticed it (let's keep quantum mechanics out of this), but it's not very likely and doesn't make sense.

But is it testable? You don't know how probable it is until it's testable; you only think you know because your philosophy of science says so.

This is an interesting conundrum. I think the big problem is that any testing of this hypothesis would involve comparing current observations of the world to past observations of the world, and when current and past observations of the same phenomenon disagree, we will be more likely to trust our current, repeatable observations, and figure the records of the past observations must be wrong somehow. Either that, or the phenomenon has changed. When the phenomenon in question is the kind of thing that we think could change, then I imagine we would most likely assume the phenomenon had changed. But if the phenomenon is something we think cannot change, a law of physics, then I imagine we might be more inclined to think the old records are wrong.

Imagine if everyone from Newton's time had measured the force of gravity at the Earth's surface to be significantly different from what we measure it to be now? What do you think our take on that would be?
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
snowyowl
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Postby snowyowl » Sat Oct 30, 2010 8:32 am UTC

These two people remind me of Rincewind from the Discworld series. He believes (among other things) the universe makes sense at a fundamental level and must abide by certain rules. Anywhere else he would have been a scientist, but unfortunately for him the Discworld doesn't make sense.
The preceding comment is an automated response.

keithc
Posts: 124
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby keithc » Sat Oct 30, 2010 2:58 pm UTC

kingworks wrote:Just because the girl said "Okay Physics. . . " why can't the disembodied voice be God? Isn't the Higgs-Boson supposed to be the "God particle?"

Actually, it was originally nicknamed the "God-damned particle", but "God particle" makes a better headline.

Encomium
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:34 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Encomium » Sat Oct 30, 2010 4:16 pm UTC

I was sort of hoping that this thread would more explicitly touch on the pseudo-religiosity adopted by some scientists (and mathematicians) within their discipline. Tyrannosaur did:
Tyrannosaur wrote:But physicists wouldn't try to talk to God, would they? They'd talk to "physics"

Thus the Science itself becomes God and there is some interesting spirituality that is born of the thought. (Like in the case of Feynman, for instance.)

The Comic itself is making references to Christianity in the water->wine transformation, and I suppose more esoterically (apparently; at least no one has mentioned it yet) in the wine->blood transformation (referencing to the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation). In this case the smudge on the table in the last frame could be bread, to pair with the communion wine/blood. Or maybe it's just an ink smudge. Whatevs.

In any case, the juxtaposition seems apt in that both Physics and Christianity have a tendency to assume exclusive access to some Truth (though the truth in question tends to be different), and the zealousness that members of different "factions" within each cling to their own ideas. (Perhaps the two physics professors who disagree, for instance.) The assertion that either Physics or Christianity doesn't have "all the answers" can really make those who adhere to them uncomfortable.

Those are my thoughts, anyway.

Fretless Bass
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 4:28 pm UTC

Re: 0812: Glass

Postby Fretless Bass » Sat Oct 30, 2010 4:37 pm UTC

I find that a song from Suzanne Vega, Caramel, fits so great with comics.

By the way, I got the job as a macrobiotic food delivery guy for a nice woman who has child with my primary school mate, and they are not together anymore. Anyway, I haven't had no relationship with any of them both till now. Since primary school I saw the guy only few times. Do you think that I should admitt to her that I have used name and surname of the father of her child for the password of the MS SQL Server?

Sounds good, no?

I'll welcome my self out. Don't bother.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mscha and 69 guests