1190: "Time"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
SBN
Saved
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:15 pm UTC
Location: No longer in the home of the raptorcats, now in the home of the raptorcats.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby SBN » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:10 am UTC

Exodies wrote:Repetition: they are not stick figures, they are merely drawn as stick figures. They are real <people in a fiction> and Grandall presents them to us as sticks.
And: Megan was not injured by the Leo, she fell on something.
And: wait for it means the next Frame, not the end of the Comic.

It's easy to see how people get religious ideas about reality when we can't even keep a few facts about a short story straight.


Either way, it seems like she is wearing shorts (or less.)
We know she was clawed, but could have further injured it when she fell.
Wait for it can mean the next frame, or the end, or to find out what it is, or he's telling us we should stop waiting until we have time, and go use the time we have.
astrotter wrote:It is not particularly clear to me at this time that we are not overanalyzing this...

Randalspeed thunk, iskinner, and other blitzers! Notes from the before-was improve the after-when.
Some Ways to Time
NetWeasel wrote:I want to put that in my sig... BUT I CAN'T!!!!

User avatar
Latent22
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:57 pm UTC
Location: NZ

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Latent22 » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:11 am UTC

sidd wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Someone should double check 2013 to see when jupiter lines up in this position this year. If this only happens at dates when other things like venus dont match then we can 100% discount 2013.


There's a few things that make the 2013 date seem unlikely.

1. The entire sky is shifted north, so that Scorpius is north of the celestial equator. This alone might be a projection error, but...

2. Venus appears in approximately the right position on 2013-11-07, but the moon should also be in Sagittarius on that date, and we haven't seen it in OTC yet.

3. There's no planet in Aquarius on that date, but we see an anomoly in OTC. Jupiter is in exactly the right place in 13291-04-14, but it is on the other side of the sky, in Gemini, on the 2013 date.

I'm sure there are imaginative explanations for all of these things if you really want the 2013 date to be true :)


Where will the moon be in 13291? If we can predict it and then it shows up later in the OTC then that may clinch it!

User avatar
k.bookbinder
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:17 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby k.bookbinder » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:26 am UTC

Good mornix all. Molpy up!

What has Cueball just gathered? Stones? I see that, with no moon as reference, it seems nearly impossible to come to some consensus as to where and when they might be located, though, all analysis seems to get everyone in the same general latitudinal range.

Again though, I must ask, because I am still not quite satisfied, regarding our direction as observers: Is everyone assuming that, as we are observing Time, we are facing West and are parallel with latitudinal lines? Because we are not a part of Time, but apart from it, if we were faced Northwest or West by Northwest, would that not change the relative celestial positions, and therefore, change the outcome of the analysis?
"HAL9000" This thread is a goldmine for signatures.
"StratPlayer" All in all, that sand paper rubbed me the wrong way.
"charlie_grumbles" The secret of the geeks. "Copy, Borrow, Steal, Succeed"
"ucim" There's a forestful of treeish people here.

Image Welcome! Confused? See here.

User avatar
TheMinim
Posts: 940
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:47 pm UTC
Location: In The Present
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby TheMinim » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:32 am UTC

Go macraw83! You're much further along this needle-pulled thing than I am! (at point of posting. 295 pages left? I'd sell my soul to be that far ahead! It's nice to see where you are from your sig)

(Mind you, you're unlikely to see this for some time. All I know is you posted in the Past. I'm only on 194 *sigh*. Better to get back to it or something)
Titled TheMinimastic as of NP 1610.
Hi Blitzers! And non-blitzers!
Official owner of NewPage 1572, and official co-owner of NewPage 2087 along with NoMouse.

User avatar
Latent22
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:57 pm UTC
Location: NZ

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Latent22 » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:39 am UTC

edfel wrote:According to Stellarium (I don't know if it takes into account earth slowing down and whatsnot... let's just assume it does or that GLR uses the same software), and if my time prediction for Venus is correct (with the 4h margin), the the longitudes at which the sun sets at the right time are between 37°W and 158°W. With the 39-40°N latitude, we have a strip crossing North America from east to west, with the curent location of New York slightly to the north and Los Angeles to the south. Btw, how much continental drift would have happened by the time?
Image
Spoiler:
strip.png


Interesting!

Seems east coast of america is most likely. I would say it has to be somewhere the GLR has been in person in the past. Some place that has significance to him personally. So makes sense if it is kind of close to where he lives. He may be leading to a ruin of a current semi famous building at the top of a mountain. If we could only find the river. We had quite a bit of detail about the river mouth layout didn't we? But things could have changed a lot in 11000 years so he could have adjusted for it.

paha arkkitehti
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:18 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby paha arkkitehti » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:41 am UTC

Has anyone tried to work out if the axis of rotation and celestial pole are where they are supposed to be for the year 13291, or is there some unexplained tilting going on?

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6905
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:42 am UTC

ucim wrote:
Scene 14

[close-up - exterior, day: The Pope, in the blitzRocket]
The Pope jumps back in his seat, startled, and looks around, but there is nobody there.
(snip)

Yay! Fresh Acts! Image
Imagesome!
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

Eutychus
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Eutychus » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:43 am UTC

I have some non-astronomical questions about the 13291 date.

It seems unlikely that Megan and Cueball would build sandcastles that so closely resemble our stylised idea of castles over 10,000 years later.

It also seems unlikely that a specific type of headgear - LaPetite's beret - should have stood the test of time, apocalypses and so on.

I'm still a Randallversalist, but I've been wondering about something more like Truman Show or as others have said, Hunger Games.
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

Zorin_75
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:33 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Zorin_75 » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:58 am UTC

Yay, 100th. Thanks, ken.

Somehow I have trouble buying into the 13291 thing. I think it's just as likely that GLR is the type of guy who couldn't stand to have a physically incorrect starry background as his webcomic's backdrop, yet doesn't want to give away an exact time and place either (would also be much less fun if we knew were we were, I think). So he probably just punched an absurd date into his software to mess with us. See the current othercomic...
Go Minim go!

User avatar
mikro2nd
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:52 pm UTC
Location: ɐɔıɹɟɐ

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mikro2nd » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:01 pm UTC

Tatiana wrote:If this really is set 11000 years in the future, it makes me think of Ursula K. Le Guin's book called Always Coming Home. Has anyone read it? It's also set something like that time, and it features a sparsely populated Earth. I can't think of any other congruences, though.

As mentioned before in our UKlG conversations, Oh Very Yes - Always Coming Home is a much-loved favourite of mine. One other congruence: The sea levels are much changed, with the resulting alterations1 to Northern California's topography. So if the Astronomers of Time seriously think we're peering some 11000 yearsH into the future, I think we're pretty screwed looking for a locations, since who knows where the coastlines will be.
One world, one soul
Time pass, the river rolls

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6905
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:04 pm UTC

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Since the stars seem to be incredibly accurate, I would assume the time has also been adjusted for the large number of leap seconds.
Spoiler:
11278 years in the future, average delta T = +1.7 ms/day/century, assuming a linear increase, the average day during this time will be about 96 ms longer than now.
11278 years * 365.25 days per year * 96 ms per day = 395,000 seconds = 4 days, 13 hours, 40 minutes, so if it is possible to work out the location on Earth based on the positions of Venus and Jupiter, then the actual location on Earth will be roughly on the opposite side. That is assuming Stellarium doesn't correct for leap seconds, which I wouldn't be too surprised about considering it does the proper motions of the stars! :D

Blind post, so probably ninja'd, but those m*stardy leap seconds might throw a spanner in the works for estimating the time of day / longitude. They're unpredictable enough that, over the course of 11,000 years, the uncertainty is probably hours, if not more...

ETA: 11,000+ years, isn't that a bit long for a pregnancy?
Last edited by mscha on Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:14 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
edfel
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:56 pm UTC
Location: On Time

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby edfel » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:07 pm UTC

mikro2nd wrote: who knows where the coastlines will be.

Only GLR knows
Waiting for it: Map of Time, same, no JS, Ages of Time.
Beginning a new story with every choice, no matter how small: Goodies.

Eutychus
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Eutychus » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:08 pm UTC

Latent22 wrote: If we could only find the river. We had quite a bit of detail about the river mouth layout didn't we? But things could have changed a lot in 11000 years so he could have adjusted for it.

For those looking for things that might have survived 10,000 years across a band of the US, I think waterfalls of the height previously seen would be rarer than rivers and, depending on geology, would not have moved that much. Wikipedia suggests that Niagara Falls has moved less then 10 miles in 10,000 years.
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6905
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:10 pm UTC

CITRONGE...
Image

-- posted by newpixbot
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
edfel
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:56 pm UTC
Location: On Time

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby edfel » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:22 pm UTC

mscha wrote:
MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Since the stars seem to be incredibly accurate, I would assume the time has also been adjusted for the large number of leap seconds.
Spoiler:
11278 years in the future, average delta T = +1.7 ms/day/century, assuming a linear increase, the average day during this time will be about 96 ms longer than now.
11278 years * 365.25 days per year * 96 ms per day = 395,000 seconds = 4 days, 13 hours, 40 minutes, so if it is possible to work out the location on Earth based on the positions of Venus and Jupiter, then the actual location on Earth will be roughly on the opposite side. That is assuming Stellarium doesn't correct for leap seconds, which I wouldn't be too surprised about considering it does the proper motions of the stars! :D

Blind post, so probably ninja'd, but those m*stardy leap seconds might throw a spanner in the works for estimating the time of day / longitude. They're unpredictable enough that, over the course of 11,000 years, the uncertainty is probably hours, if not more...


Actually, they don't raise any problem to find a location: the sky will be seen as in the comic over the red strip, independently of the "local time" (it's like predicting the position from which an eclipse will be seen: it's independent from bissextile years). The only hypothesis I see for the strip to be acurate is that 1- we got the right year (maybe the same congruence appears every 150 years or so, I don't know) and 2-if the earth rotation slows down, then stellarium takes that into account.

Edit: Okay, after looking into details at all this, the cause for leap seconds being the variation of the earth's speed, then yes it's all related. I don't know what's the consensus about this when doing long-term simulations, I just hope that GLR and Stellarium used the same approach.
Last edited by edfel on Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:31 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Waiting for it: Map of Time, same, no JS, Ages of Time.
Beginning a new story with every choice, no matter how small: Goodies.

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Neil_Boekend » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:24 pm UTC

Wow, I sleep for a fewpix and suddenly an exact date (not "just"1 approximately 14000 years into the future) and an aproximate position! Awefull!.
On the Queball moving issue: If I scroll through Geekwagon with previous frame difference I can't see any movement (exept for stars) for 20 newpix. So he hasn't moved at all.
By the way: IMHO that also means he hasn't fallen asleep. When I doze off my head drops down. In a sitting position there is a large chance of a rude awakening due to the drop.
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

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

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby cellocgw » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:27 pm UTC

Exodies wrote:
Rule110 wrote:Ah: cold mentioned again. If that becomes a serious issue, maybe the ensuing dialog will resolve the clothing question. (We can surmise that Megan's legs are bare or clad in tights or stockings, because a flag-bandage wouldn't show under a long skirt or slacks. TIghts seem unlikely because she couldn't have removed them while sitting down to get bandaged, without a lot of movement that would have been noticeable.)

It might seem I'm obsessing over clothing -- "Ooh, naked stick figures! *leer*" -- but knowing one way or the other would be a huge clue about their backgrounds and circumstances.

Repetition: they are not stick figures, they are merely drawn as stick figures. They are real <people in a fiction> and Grandall presents them to us as sticks.
And: Megan was not injured by the Leo, she fell on something.
And: wait for it means the next Frame, not the end of the Comic.

It's easy to see how people get religious ideas about reality when we can't even keep a few facts about a short story straight.


What-- religious factions in the OTT? :P Well, then, I guess I'm a Stickist -- or is that Stickler -- for insisting that they really are stick people in a stick-universe.

Besides, I'm tired of stars :cry: so let's argue about something else for a while.
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
TheMinim
Posts: 940
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:47 pm UTC
Location: In The Present
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Thing that keeps slipping into the future"

Postby TheMinim » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:30 pm UTC

Page 195

Buffygirl hats herself! Are these the humble beginnings of the Buffydashery?
Titled TheMinimastic as of NP 1610.
Hi Blitzers! And non-blitzers!
Official owner of NewPage 1572, and official co-owner of NewPage 2087 along with NoMouse.

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6905
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:33 pm UTC

Animation update. 49 frames since sundown, brightened with gamma 3.
Image

Cueball's been up & about, as y'all noticed. Looks like he picked up some more meowpy defense ammo (= stones).
Image

ETA: No more molpy activity. Prediction: large molpy activity (e.g. Lucky or friends) within 10 newpix.
Last edited by mscha on Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:42 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

Eutychus
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Eutychus » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:35 pm UTC

mikro2nd wrote:If this really is set 11000 years in the future, it makes me think of Ursula K. Le Guin's book called Always Coming Home. Has anyone read it? It's also set something like that time, and it features a sparsely populated Earth. I can't think of any other congruences, though.

The Napa valley, on which I understand the book to be based, is not a million miles from 39.5° N...
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

User avatar
k.bookbinder
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:17 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby k.bookbinder » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:46 pm UTC

mikro2nd wrote:
Tatiana wrote:If this really is set 11000 years in the future, it makes me think of Ursula K. Le Guin's book called Always Coming Home. Has anyone read it? It's also set something like that time, and it features a sparsely populated Earth. I can't think of any other congruences, though.

As mentioned before in our UKlG conversations, Oh Very Yes - Always Coming Home is a much-loved favourite of mine. One other congruence: The sea levels are much changed, with the resulting alterations1 to Northern California's topography. So if the Astronomers of Time seriously think we're peering some 11000 yearsH into the future, I think we're pretty screwed looking for a locations, since who knows where the coastlines will be.


In theory, analysis of the celestial bodies of Time would yield a coordinate result, latitude and longitude. Regardless of geographical changes to Time Earth, a location could be estimated, if not pinpointed.
"HAL9000" This thread is a goldmine for signatures.
"StratPlayer" All in all, that sand paper rubbed me the wrong way.
"charlie_grumbles" The secret of the geeks. "Copy, Borrow, Steal, Succeed"
"ucim" There's a forestful of treeish people here.

Image Welcome! Confused? See here.

Eutychus
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Eutychus » Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:47 pm UTC

Hah!

"Mustard growing in a Napa Valley vineyard" :D

Spoiler:
Image
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

User avatar
jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby jjjdavidson » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:07 pm UTC

SittONG back down...
Image
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
Helpful links: Time Wiki FAQrot-13 / Morse decoders
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. :) Ex-Loopist. :(

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:19 pm UTC

Quick check-in before I head to the airport... what's this exact date 14000 years hence mentioned? Where's the OP?
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
IceIsNice
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 7:12 pm UTC
Location: Neat

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby IceIsNice » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:21 pm UTC

A little disappointed not to see any meteors yet. Just one streaking across -- that isn't too much to ask for, is it?
Hi! Probably.

sidd
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:01 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby sidd » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:22 pm UTC

For everyone without awesome plannetarium software to ogle, compare:

Stellarium western sky on 13291-04-10 @ 40oN:

Spoiler:
stellarium-000.png


NoMouse's stitched image:

NoMouse wrote:
Spoiler:
The attachment 2394-2431_stitch-planar.png is no longer available

Image

1 Freeware!

User avatar
k.bookbinder
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:17 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby k.bookbinder » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:26 pm UTC

Kieryn wrote:Quick check-in before I head to the airport... what's this exact date 14000 years hence mentioned? Where's the OP?


I do not know. But once again, safe travels! :D
"HAL9000" This thread is a goldmine for signatures.
"StratPlayer" All in all, that sand paper rubbed me the wrong way.
"charlie_grumbles" The secret of the geeks. "Copy, Borrow, Steal, Succeed"
"ucim" There's a forestful of treeish people here.

Image Welcome! Confused? See here.

User avatar
Marsh'n
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:55 pm UTC
Location: Blitzing: 609-918, then 1000-2247 +/- schizms

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Marsh'n » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:30 pm UTC

Rule110 wrote:That's assuming the rate of time passage stays constant -- that is to say, that the current acceleration rate of zero newpix per newpix per newpix does not increase.


Uh, any chance you could restate that with a bit more heresy?

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:38 pm UTC

eta oin shrdlu wrote:
edo wrote:What we need to do is cycle through the millenia looking at Sagittarius until the celestial equator aligns with the straight line coming from the upper left corner. Then cycle through the months until the sun is in Lybra
We need jupiter or Mars to complete the match
(I'm on my phone right now so I can't)
Here's a Stellarium picture of the date (13291/04/14) I proposed above:
Spoiler:
37.75N-13291-04-14.png

MattTheTubaGuy and others have proposed other dates which have slightly different solar declinations (and different locations for the other planets-not-yet-seen).

The rough dates ~15000AD are pretty much needed for the details of the starfields to align, but that only gets to within a few thousand years. The orbits of Venus and Earth are very near an 8-[Earth-]year cycle, so 8-year steps will produce fairly similar results; I don't claim the date above is the best possible fit.


If this is what we're talking about I have some sad news...
http://kieryn.com/xkcd-time/img/13291.png

I suspect different versions give different results.
This is from the win 64bit version. Essentially, I think at that far in the future the stars positions are predictable, but the planets are subject to complete chaos. There's no way of knowing where they will be.
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

sidd
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:01 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby sidd » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:43 pm UTC

IceIsNice wrote:A little disappointed not to see any meteors yet. Just one streaking across -- that isn't too much to ask for, is it?


A comet would be nice. 13291 is almost exactly 150 Halley's orbits from now: 1986 + 75.3 * 150 = 13281

User avatar
fhorn
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 3:07 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby fhorn » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:49 pm UTC

mscha wrote:Animation update. 49 frames since sundown, brightened with gamma 3.
Spoiler:
Image

Cueball's been up & about, as y'all noticed. Looks like he picked up some more meowpy defense ammo (= stones).
Image

ETA: No more molpy activity. Prediction: large molpy activity (e.g. Lucky or friends) within 10 newpix.


mscha, thank you, as always, for these. Without them, I'd be staring at a mostly black star-filled screen.
I'd still be Waiting, of course; but it's much nicer to wait knowledgeably.
"...or I shall have to find Chekov myself, and shoot him with his own damn gun" - k.bookbinder
unteaching is the hardest teaching

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 622
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby moody7277 » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:59 pm UTC

Latent22 wrote:
Spoiler:
sidd wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Someone should double check 2013 to see when jupiter lines up in this position this year. If this only happens at dates when other things like venus dont match then we can 100% discount 2013.


There's a few things that make the 2013 date seem unlikely.

1. The entire sky is shifted north, so that Scorpius is north of the celestial equator. This alone might be a projection error, but...

2. Venus appears in approximately the right position on 2013-11-07, but the moon should also be in Sagittarius on that date, and we haven't seen it in OTC yet.

3. There's no planet in Aquarius on that date, but we see an anomoly in OTC. Jupiter is in exactly the right place in 13291-04-14, but it is on the other side of the sky, in Gemini, on the 2013 date.

I'm sure there are imaginative explanations for all of these things if you really want the 2013 date to be true :)


Where will the moon be in 13291? If we can predict it and then it shows up later in the OTC then that may clinch it!


According to Stellarium, the moon won't be in frame before sunrise.

Kieryn wrote:If this is what we're talking about I have some sad news...
http://kieryn.com/xkcd-time/img/13291.png

I suspect different versions give different results.
This is from the win 64bit version. Essentially, I think at that far in the future the stars positions are predictable, but the planets are subject to complete chaos. There's no way of knowing where they will be.


That's why some other people, me included, found a better fit for April 10th for Venus' position.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6905
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:01 pm UTC

Cueball hearONG something?
Image

ETA: brightened version:
Spoiler:
Image
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
wizpretz
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:28 am UTC
Location: None of your business

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby wizpretz » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:10 pm UTC

edfel wrote:According to Stellarium (I don't know if it takes into account earth slowing down and whatsnot... let's just assume it does or that GLR uses the same software), and if my time prediction for Venus is correct (with the 4h margin), the the longitudes at which the sun sets at the right time are between 37°W and 158°W. With the 39-40°N latitude, we have a strip crossing North America from east to west, with the curent location of New York slightly to the north and Los Angeles to the south. Btw, how much continental drift would have happened by the time?
Spoiler:
Image

I live in that area! I'm with Latent22 about the location probably being of some significance to GLR. Of course that all depends on whether or not we're supposed to be able to get a definite location from this and it's not just some pretty stars, as I believe.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Moon!

Postby Whizbang » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:16 pm UTC

Fun Fact:
The sea did not have any noticeable motion. Given the attention to detail on everything else, this is very suspicious. The fact that it is rising more than normal is very suggestive as well. We all know this, but I wanted to state the obvious in order to refresh it in our minds.

Now, we still don't have a confirmation on the moon, but when one thinks of sea motion and rising, one thinks of the moon. What if every person on Earth aimed a laser pointer at the Moon at the same time? This may explain the sea and the moonless(?) night.

What if it is all related?

Also, assuming the moon has been destroyed/stolen, how would this affect the earth's axis? How would this affect continental drift? How would this affect the Earth's orbit? How would this affect the night sky 13,000 years from now?

User avatar
ttscp
Posts: 296
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:05 pm UTC
Location: Lost In Thought - Send Search Party

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby ttscp » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:23 pm UTC

Neil_Boekend wrote:...
On the Queball moving issue: If I scroll through Geekwagon with previous frame difference I can't see any movement (exept for stars) for 20 newpix. So he hasn't moved at all.
...

mscha's excellent animationM makes it clear that Cueball is moving around.

It looks to me like geekwagon (Deplicator?) adjusted the difference filter to remove cruft from the sky darkening; the stars stand out much better. However it also looks like we lose Cueball's moves.

mikro2nd wrote:
Tatiana wrote:If this really is set 11000 years in the future, it makes me think of Ursula K. Le Guin's book called Always Coming Home. Has anyone read it? It's also set something like that time, and it features a sparsely populated Earth. I can't think of any other congruences, though.

As mentioned before in our UKlG conversations, Oh Very Yes - Always Coming Home is a much-loved favourite of mine. ...


Count me in as loving Always Coming Home, also. It doesn't have a structure that resolves for me the way an ordinary novel does, but the experience of that world has stayed with me.

M thank you again
Always act to increase the survival chances of the largest group you are a part of.

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Neil_Boekend » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:25 pm UTC

edfel wrote:Edit: Okay, after looking into details at all this, the cause for leap seconds being the variation of the earth's speed, then yes it's all related. I don't know what's the consensus about this when doing long-term simulations, I just hope that GLR and Stellarium used the same approach.

According to Wikipedia the slow-down due to tides is only 2,3 ms/century. This means the total wouldn't be a second and thus quite irrelevant.
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

User avatar
edfel
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:56 pm UTC
Location: On Time

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby edfel » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:33 pm UTC

Long term future or not, this all made me take into perspective huge dates like that. I didn't use to make any difference between 10^4 and 10^6 years, now 10^4 years has got some personality: it's slightly older than earliest egyptian civilisations (7000 years), and 30,000 years after early cave painting, but it's nothing compared to Lucy (3.2 million years) or even mountains like the alps (biggest evolution: 55 million years ago).

Continents would drift only by a few kilometers in that time, evolution of large species wouldn't be noticeable (but insects, etc. may get to change a lot if necessary).

With a speed of light vessel, there's time for 1000 return trips to alpha centauri, but no way to get all the way to andromeda (3.2Mly).
Waiting for it: Map of Time, same, no JS, Ages of Time.
Beginning a new story with every choice, no matter how small: Goodies.

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:34 pm UTC

moody7277 wrote:
Latent22 wrote:
Spoiler:
sidd wrote:
Latent22 wrote:Someone should double check 2013 to see when jupiter lines up in this position this year. If this only happens at dates when other things like venus dont match then we can 100% discount 2013.


There's a few things that make the 2013 date seem unlikely.

1. The entire sky is shifted north, so that Scorpius is north of the celestial equator. This alone might be a projection error, but...

2. Venus appears in approximately the right position on 2013-11-07, but the moon should also be in Sagittarius on that date, and we haven't seen it in OTC yet.

3. There's no planet in Aquarius on that date, but we see an anomoly in OTC. Jupiter is in exactly the right place in 13291-04-14, but it is on the other side of the sky, in Gemini, on the 2013 date.

I'm sure there are imaginative explanations for all of these things if you really want the 2013 date to be true :)


Where will the moon be in 13291? If we can predict it and then it shows up later in the OTC then that may clinch it!


According to Stellarium, the moon won't be in frame before sunrise.

Kieryn wrote:If this is what we're talking about I have some sad news...
http://kieryn.com/xkcd-time/img/13291.png

I suspect different versions give different results.
This is from the win 64bit version. Essentially, I think at that far in the future the stars positions are predictable, but the planets are subject to complete chaos. There's no way of knowing where they will be.


That's why some other people, me included, found a better fit for April 10th for Venus' position.


It is however cool pretty neat that we can for sure place it at about 10-14 thousand years in the future.
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
BigDaddy
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 3:52 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby BigDaddy » Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:46 pm UTC

Could Randall have sold out and this is viral marketing for After Earth?

Keep watching the skies and wait for it.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Thesh and 41 guests