Page 1 of 3

0812: "Glass"

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:12 am UTC
by black_hat_guy
Image
Title-Text: 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!

This is just creepy.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:14 am UTC
by wackojacko1138
I guess the laws of physics still haven't recovered from the latest Order of the Stick.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:16 am UTC
by ezzieyguywuf
You know what this made me think of? This episode of Yes Dear when the guy's on the roof and accidentally falls off. The mom says "Hey are you alright?" and he says "Yea, I was just testing the gravity. It still works don't worry". If only she had jumped out from behind the door and scared the bajeezus out of him....

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:16 am UTC
by IIAOPSW
funny. must be a very precise resonant frequency to turn water to blood.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:17 am UTC
by black_hat_guy
Being atheist, I guess I just don't like the idea of physics being sentient. I was explaining the police officer metaphor for virtual particles to a friend and he said he was a physics police. This made me cringe.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:33 am UTC
by webgiant
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.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:41 am UTC
by black_hat_guy
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.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:57 am UTC
by WontonSoup
Reminds me of "It MUST be true! I read it on the internet!"

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:59 am UTC
by katrmr
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.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:01 am UTC
by hrasdt
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?

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:02 am UTC
by katrmr
@black_hat_guy: can you really be sure that a chair, when you turn your back to it, doesn't transform into a rabbit?

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:04 am UTC
by black_hat_guy
I can't.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:14 am UTC
by Val
They should have realized something was up when the half notes floated in mid-fucking-air!

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:24 am UTC
by Ghavrel
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.


I started having trouble trusting PhDs when I started going to college. Probably a liberal arts thing.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:55 am UTC
by Gamer_2k4
what is going on here

no really

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:59 am UTC
by dysprog
Ghavrel wrote:
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.


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

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:02 am UTC
by davidstarlingm
Ghavrel wrote:
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.


I started having trouble trusting PhDs when I started going to college. Probably a liberal arts thing.


I started having trouble trusting PhDs when I got to my second year of undergraduate physics and realized that two of my professors disagreed. Probably a science thing.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:06 am UTC
by davidstarlingm
black_hat_guy wrote:Title-Text: 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!


Whether you trust what the guy-with-degree wrote should depend not so much on the degree but rather on what other things the guy-with-degree wrote (and published). #advantagesofapeerreviewsystem

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:06 am UTC
by Ghavrel
dysprog wrote: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

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

People in humanities aren't just coming up with things; they're applying systematic methods of analysis. Just because the method of analysis isn't empirical doesn't mean it's fabricated. Likewise, empiricism can be abused. Only I get to be deprecatory about what I study!

davidstarlingm wrote:I started having trouble trusting PhDs when I got to my second year of undergraduate physics and realized that two of my professors disagreed. Probably a science thing.


This too is true.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:08 am UTC
by phlip
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.

Not necessarily, pretty much anything you can get at a University can be called a degree, it doesn't have to be a doctorate.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:19 am UTC
by NotAllThere
black_hat_guy wrote:Being atheist, I guess I just don't like the idea of physics being sentient...
I think only fundementalist Jedi knights would like the idea.

The term "degree" usually applies to Bachelors. If another kind of degree is meant, it'll be qualified - e.g. "Master's degree". In Europe at least.

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. :?

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:19 am UTC
by Ghandi 2
What the fuck is this shit?

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:21 am UTC
by NotAllThere
Ghandi 2 wrote:What the fuck is this shit?

At last. A witty, intelligent comment.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:23 am UTC
by ┬▒EDy
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

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:36 am UTC
by darthdavid
Ultimately, you should be analyzing any statements made by anyone (regardless of their level of education) on those statement's own merits if you're going to be make an important decision based on said statements. Having a reputable degree from a reputable university does show that someone has put in the time and effort to gain a decent understanding in their chosen field so you ought to accord them a bit more trust on matters pertaining to that field right off the bat, but you shouldn't automatically assume they're right about anything. Likewise, there are plenty of other measures one can use to determine how much credence to give someone right off the bat but at the end of the day what matters is what they're saying and whether the evidence supports it.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:40 am UTC
by Red Hal
So you're saying that doggedness with garden implements is a substitute for knowledge?

Assuming the 'many simulations' hypothesis, this comic presents an entirely plausible scenario.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:58 am UTC
by madock345
wackojacko1138 wrote:I guess the laws of physics still haven't recovered from the latest Order of the Stick.

You sir, just won the internet

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:04 am UTC
by Matthias
Eh, this one is a bit of a letdown after such a good start to the week and a pretty good followup on Wednesday.

I'm redeeming it in my own mind by pretending it's a scene from a Nobilis game. :P

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:23 am UTC
by Singulaire
You have to cut Physics some slack. I mean, think of it from her point of view:
Every time she thinks up something clever, we figure it out and start abusing it to do ridiculous things like flying and transmitting power wirelessly. 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. And then we start using THAT and treating it like it's a great time. If you were Physics, you would snap too.

N.B.- yes, I characterised Physics as a singular female entity. I think Feynman did that once. Or maybe he was talking about nature? Fuck, then... uhm.. I guess that's what my old D&D handbooks used to refer to third persons of unknown gender.

wackojacko1138 wrote:I guess the laws of physics still haven't recovered from the latest Order of the Stick.


honestly, I'm surprised gravity doesn't just do this to wizards

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:24 am UTC
by Lucia
Sadly, this just confuses me.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:29 am UTC
by TurtleMidget
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.
Edit2: Also, what the crap is on the table in the last panel?

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:09 am UTC
by brood
the ledger lines on the music notes bug me. I get why they're there, but it still looks pretty awkward.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:20 am UTC
by alun009
"No, wait. This is blood"

What sort of person would be able to immediately (and correctly) identify a glass of blood. :twisted: :P

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 8:32 am UTC
by SW15243
Singulaire wrote: ...reality being dependent on observation...

I'm an English major.
Short version: Earth has draw distance?
And, more importantly, can we use quantum mechanics to finally answer the 'if a tree falls in the forest' question?

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:07 am UTC
by Tualha
NotAllThere wrote:
black_hat_guy 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. :?

Heinlein's "Waldo" touched upon that concept. Bear's novel Blood Music used a similar concept, and there was a short version, but I don't think that concept was in it.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:10 am UTC
by Tualha
alun009 wrote:"No, wait. This is blood"

What sort of person would be able to immediately (and correctly) identify a glass of blood. :twisted: :P

Spoilered for gross:
Spoiler:
Anyone who's had a lot of nosebleeds. By smell.

Edit: I suppose a lot of people will find that disgusting. Sorry. It's true, though.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:45 am UTC
by mcv
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.

Sometimes I wonder if God isn't just making stuff up as he goes along, but wants to present a logically consistent universe to us, and the more we discover about how the universe works, the more he feels bound to stick to the rules.

And then we caught him into some inconsistencies, and he quickly made up Quantum Mechanics overnight. At least that's how WM sometimes feels to me.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:27 am UTC
by Ninto55
Matthias wrote:Eh, this one is a bit of a letdown after such a good start to the week and a pretty good followup on Wednesday.

I'm redeeming it in my own mind by pretending it's a scene from a Nobilis game. :P

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:37 am UTC
by melladh
Tualha wrote:
alun009 wrote:"No, wait. This is blood"

What sort of person would be able to immediately (and correctly) identify a glass of blood. :twisted: :P

Spoilered for gross:
Spoiler:
Anyone who's had a lot of nosebleeds. By smell.

Edit: I suppose a lot of people will find that disgusting. Sorry. It's true, though.


Also, vampires.
...not the sparkly kind. They're not really vampires.

Re: 0812: Glass

Posted: Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:48 am UTC
by Sharon_Gaughan
Randall has ramped up his marriage-themed strips lately. This is one of his best.