1318: "Actually"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 766
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

1318: "Actually"

Postby rhomboidal » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:20 am UTC

Image

Title Text: Protip: You can win every exchange just by being one level more precise than whoever talked last. Eventually, you'll defeat all conversational opponents and stand alone.

"Actually, measurements suggest that circular reasoning is flat..."

Farabor
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:46 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Farabor » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:23 am UTC

Actually, there's a homeomorphism between all of them, so they're the same, really!

(Okay, so I'm just learning topology now, so sue me....)

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

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Djehutynakht » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:25 am UTC

Okay, admit it. How many people physically turned their monitor/laptop upside down in order to read this in a circle?


Too bad we didn't have someone like Beret Guy's input in this sphere. The humor would be nice.

firestar27
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:26 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby firestar27 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:34 am UTC

Farabor wrote:Actually, there's a homeomorphism between all of them, so they're the same, really!

(Okay, so I'm just learning topology now, so sue me....)


Um, actually, I can't think of any homeomorphism between a plane and a sphere. If the sphere was filled in, then they could both contract to a point, but that would be homotopy, not homeomorphisms.

Keep on with the topology though! It sort of define all other math on the way as well. :)

User avatar
San Fran Sam
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:54 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby San Fran Sam » Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:40 am UTC

Actually, I want to make a literally/figuratively joke. but I literally just can't come up with anything.

Harry Voyager
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:55 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Harry Voyager » Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:41 am UTC

Ironically enough, we assume that it is both flat, and at the center of the universe when doing near earth space navigation.

You do, however, need to remember that the height is measured from the center of the earth, rather than mean sea level, as is common in more conventional navigation schemes. Otherwise you get some... interesting... anomalies.

User avatar
San Fran Sam
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:54 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby San Fran Sam » Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:42 am UTC

firestar27 wrote:
Farabor wrote:Actually, there's a homeomorphism between all of them, so they're the same, really!

(Okay, so I'm just learning topology now, so sue me....)


Um, actually, I can't think of any homeomorphism between a plane and a sphere. If the sphere was filled in, then they could both contract to a point, but that would be homotopy, not homeomorphisms.

Keep on with the topology though! It sort of define all other math on the way as well. :)


The only thing I can remember about topology is that a doughnut and a coffee cup are the same. but somehow I could never get my head around dunking a coffee cup into a doughnut.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Coyne » Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:00 am UTC

Actually, it's a shape better defined by the EGM2008 coefficients.

(I win! \o/ )

:D
In all fairness...

sotanaht
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 2:14 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby sotanaht » Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:11 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Okay, admit it. How many people physically turned their monitor/laptop upside down in order to read this in a circle?


Too bad we didn't have someone like Beret Guy's input in this sphere. The humor would be nice.

Actually if I wanted to do that I could just flip the orientation from the screen resolution menu in windows (7). Although I can actually read upside down just fine (actually slower but w/e) so I didn't bother. Actually though I read the comic from this thread since it hadn't actually updated for me for some reason until this edit. (Ok I'll stop now)

firestar27 wrote:
Farabor wrote:Actually, there's a homeomorphism between all of them, so they're the same, really!

(Okay, so I'm just learning topology now, so sue me....)


Um, actually, I can't think of any homeomorphism between a plane and a sphere. If the sphere was filled in, then they could both contract to a point, but that would be homotopy, not homeomorphisms.

Keep on with the topology though! It sort of define all other math on the way as well. :)


I'm not exactly an expert on the subject but are you referring to a plane as a two-dimensional object or what the conception of a flat-earth would look like which is more of a disc, it's a 3d object with a flat unbroken surface.

Keiji
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:17 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Keiji » Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:36 am UTC

Am I the only one wondering if in the "Actually, measurements suggest it's flat", the "it" is actually referring to the universe from the previous sentence, stating it's flat instead of curved?

That would make the entire argument recursive, rather than circular.

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

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby ttscp » Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:52 am UTC

Keiji wrote:Am I the only one wondering if in the "Actually, measurements suggest it's flat", the "it" is actually referring to the universe from the previous sentence, stating it's flat instead of curved?

That would make the entire argument recursive, rather than circular.

That's the way I read it, except the recursion starts with the original flat earth hypothesis and is only modified to flat universe after the first time through the circle. A recursive argument, because Randall would never use a circular one.
Always act to increase the survival chances of the largest group you are a part of.

User avatar
LazyMonk
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:27 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby LazyMonk » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:04 am UTC

The alt text nails it... Absolute precision is not all it's cracked up to be.

Wooloomooloo
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:05 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Wooloomooloo » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:12 am UTC

I do wonder though - if something looks like a sphere but it's in a part of space curved by its own gravity, what would it look like in a perfectly flat space (unmodified by gravity)...? Symmetry would suggest it would still be a sphere, I guess...? And how about a geoid? Or, as Lem might ask, a... cube...?

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 1960
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Flumble » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:15 am UTC

San Fran Sam wrote:Actually, I want to make a literally/figuratively joke. but I literally just can't come up with anything.

Actually, you could equally well say figuratively in the second sentence.

Yes, I actually try not to sound like someone who'd just fall for the joke. Except if you said that dead serious, in which case it's become a meta-joke.

m.alessandrini
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:10 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby m.alessandrini » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:37 am UTC

Usually in forums people use "Actually..." as the first step in a range that goes on with "Technically you're correct, but...", then "Except that..." and then verging on the a**hole country.

m.alessandrini
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:10 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby m.alessandrini » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:48 am UTC

Wooloomooloo wrote:I do wonder though - if something looks like a sphere but it's in a part of space curved by its own gravity, what would it look like in a perfectly flat space (unmodified by gravity)...? Symmetry would suggest it would still be a sphere, I guess...? And how about a geoid? Or, as Lem might ask, a... cube...?


Actually, gravity is what formed spheres through simmetry. And, what about the observer, isn't he curved by gravity as well? Do two curvatures add, or elide? Maybe Randall Munroe is a sphere and he doesn't know :D
Last edited by m.alessandrini on Fri Jan 17, 2014 9:30 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Kaktus Kontrafaktus
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:10 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Kaktus Kontrafaktus » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:52 am UTC

I made it rotate (onyl for fast readers, though): bit.ly/1auz5PU

(I'm not allowed to use [img], feel free to repost/embed this)

The Synologist
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:50 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby The Synologist » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:54 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Okay, admit it. How many people physically turned their monitor/laptop upside down in order to read this in a circle?

I accidentally discovered that I can flip my screen in all four directions by hitting ctrl+alt+arrow key awhile back. Which is great, because I can't read sideways or upside-down at all. Came in quite handy for this comic.

Ziggid
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:50 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Ziggid » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:55 am UTC

Well actually, we're all trapped in the world of Mario Galaxy

NoKaOi
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:32 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby NoKaOi » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:56 am UTC

Protip: If you want to stay married (or keep a girlfriend, or get a girlfriend), and you are about to begin a sentence with "actually" then DON'T SAY IT.
Options for alternative sentences include:
    -Yes honey.
    -Oh, that's an interesting way of looking at it.
Or, if if she's not really paying attention:
    -Ah
    -Huh
    -I see
Or, if the thing she said is about to result in serious injury or death:
    -Yeah, that's what I would have thought too, but all the doctors I've ever been to told me...
Do not, under any circumstances, begin a sentence with "actually." Actually, I take that back, if you want her to dump you so you don't have to dump her, especially if she's the crazy stalker type, then go ahead, use "actually."

User avatar
StClair
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:07 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby StClair » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:56 am UTC

For values of "win" that mostly correlate to being a lonely, friendless pedant.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby da Doctah » Fri Jan 17, 2014 9:11 am UTC

The Synologist wrote:I accidentally discovered that I can flip my screen in all four directions by hitting ctrl+alt+arrow key awhile back.
You don't want to do this if your normal configuration involves an "extended" desktop of two monitors, each a different size. Trust me, just don't.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2766
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jan 17, 2014 9:40 am UTC

Actually, English is the only language which uses "actually" in this way. Cognates are common in Germanic, Romance and Slavic languages, but as far as I know they all mean "currently". What do our non-native English speakers make of this comic?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

Kit.
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Kit. » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:45 am UTC

firestar27 wrote:
Farabor wrote:Actually, there's a homeomorphism between all of them, so they're the same, really!

(Okay, so I'm just learning topology now, so sue me....)

Um, actually, I can't think of any homeomorphism between a plane and a sphere.

Actually, there is a homeomorphism between a sphere and an extended plane (a plane with added "infinity" point), and quite a lot of (if not all) complex analysis is based on it.

User avatar
necroforest
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:46 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby necroforest » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:08 pm UTC

IIRC, EGM96 defines the gravitational potential (or, deviation from an ideal gravitational potential), but not the actual shape. The shape is typically modeled as an ellipsoid (WGS84) + local topography (which is usually a sampled grid of 'height-above-ellipsoid' values)
ONE PART CLASS, ONE PART WHISKEY, TWO PARTS GUN! SERVE NEAT!

User avatar
Locoluis
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:30 pm UTC
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Locoluis » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:59 pm UTC

The lack of symmetry between the positions of each stick figure may be disturbing to people with OCD.
Sueños del Sur - A webcomic about four siblings, their family, friends, adventures and dreams.
http://sds.lgm.cl/

User avatar
drachefly
Posts: 187
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:25 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby drachefly » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:14 pm UTC

San Fran Sam wrote:Actually, I want to make a literally/figuratively joke. but I literally just can't come up with anything.


You read Basic Instructions, don't you?

Wooloomooloo wrote:I do wonder though - if something looks like a sphere but it's in a part of space curved by its own gravity, what would it look like in a perfectly flat space (unmodified by gravity)...? Symmetry would suggest it would still be a sphere, I guess...? And how about a geoid? Or, as Lem might ask, a... cube...?


With the defects in that sphere that everyone had been discussing, in principle, one could tell the difference.

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Red Hal » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:22 pm UTC

Locoluis wrote:The lack of symmetry between the positions of each stick figure may be disturbing to people with OCD.
XKOCD?
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

User avatar
Robocop
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:06 am UTC
Location: Michigan

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Robocop » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:43 pm UTC

firestar27 wrote:
Farabor wrote:Actually, there's a homeomorphism between all of them, so they're the same, really!

(Okay, so I'm just learning topology now, so sue me....)


Um, actually, I can't think of any homeomorphism between a plane and a sphere. If the sphere was filled in, then they could both contract to a point, but that would be homotopy, not homeomorphisms.

Keep on with the topology though! It sort of define all other math on the way as well. :)


I think what the OP was remembering was that they are all manifolds that have local flatness. Meaning every point in each has a neighborhood that is homeomorphic to the plane.

Kit. wrote:Actually, there is a homeomorphism between a sphere and an extended plane (a plane with added "infinity" point), and quite a lot of (if not all) complex analysis is based on it.


I remember this! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_sphere

dp2
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:06 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby dp2 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:53 pm UTC

I make a conscious effort not to use "actually" in any post I write because it's among the most overused words on the Internet. It's the first thing that comes to mind when you want to refute something someone said, which is what most posts on the Internet are for (the ones that are instead in agreement employ another overused word, "This."). Much like what I posted about in the "Photo" thread, I feel that it's lazy.

I challenge everyone reading this to step up your writing by finding alternatives to "actually" and "This." in your posting.
Last edited by dp2 on Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:59 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Coyoty » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:58 pm UTC

Actually, dimensions are Newtonian locally and become more uncertain further out.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2766
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:04 pm UTC

dp2 wrote:I challenge everyone reading this to step up your writing by finding alternatives to "actually" and "This." in your posting.

May I take this opportunity to concur most emphatically with the above.
Actually, I have only just discovered "This.", and am reluctant to cut short my enjoyment thereof. Get back to me in a year's time and I might reconsider.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

bondsbw
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:37 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby bondsbw » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:39 pm UTC

Coyoty wrote:Actually, dimensions are Newtonian locally and become more uncertain further out.


Actually, any Reimannian manifold is smooth, meaning that for every point you can "zoom in" far enough that local measurements are practically linear/flat.

cryptoengineer
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 4:58 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby cryptoengineer » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:51 pm UTC

Actually, it's Earth-shaped.

Seriously, it is what it is. All the characters are trying to claim it's shaped like something else, something which can be described more simply. In every case, their simplification is inaccurate.

'The map is not the territory.' - Korzybski

The only accurate model would be another identical Earth.

The only accurate description would be a raster map down at Planck length.

Choose the model and level of accuracy you need for your purpose, and don't sweat the small stuff.

ce

jgh
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:04 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby jgh » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:51 pm UTC

Actually, pi is precisely 3.128756238400923634859027251183659673529263549560904572528495.
(I never claimed accuracy)

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:17 pm UTC

cryptoengineer wrote:Actually, it's Earth-shaped.

The only accurate model would be another identical Earth.

ce



!This :twisted: Actually there can't be an identical Earth due to the Pauli exclusion principle. It might look the same but its quantum numbers will be different.
Plus Spock probably wears a goatee and intends to take over the identical Enterprise.
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
Quicksilver
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:21 am UTC

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Quicksilver » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:19 pm UTC

The Old Superheroes Home!
...Sorry, the elderly
...No, the senior
..ALRIGHT, fine! the, chronologically gifted superheroes home!

can we PLEASE move on before they come up with a new euphemism? Can't say anything fun these days can you?

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

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby Klear » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:20 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:Actually, English is the only language which uses "actually" in this way. Cognates are common in Germanic, Romance and Slavic languages, but as far as I know they all mean "currently". What do our non-native English speakers make of this comic?


In Czech, "aktuálně" indeed means currently, something which caused me a lot of confusion when learning English. The correct translation is usually "vlastně", from "vlastnit" - "to posses", though in this particular construction we'd say something like "In reality, ..."

Similar to this is the difference between "eventually", which means "in the end" and Czech "eventuálně", which means "alternatively".

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

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby chris857 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:27 pm UTC

Klear wrote:In Czech, "aktuálně" indeed means currently, something which caused me a lot of confusion when learning English. The correct translation is usually "vlastně", from "vlastnit" - "to posses", though in this particular construction we'd say something like "In reality, ..."


Actually, this isn't the only language where this is true. Spanish is the same way, where "actualmente" mean "currently". Granted, I'm a native English speaker, so the lesson is: when learning a new language, watch out for false cognates.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2766
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1318: "Actually"

Postby orthogon » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:30 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
orthogon wrote:Actually, English is the only language which uses "actually" in this way. Cognates are common in Germanic, Romance and Slavic languages, but as far as I know they all mean "currently". What do our non-native English speakers make of this comic?


In Czech, "aktuálně" indeed means currently, something which caused me a lot of confusion when learning English. The correct translation is usually "vlastně", from "vlastnit" - "to posses", though in this particular construction we'd say something like "In reality, ..."

Similar to this is the difference between "eventually", which means "in the end" and Czech "eventuálně", which means "alternatively".

What about "presently"? It means "in the near future" in EN-GB, whereas EN-US uses "momentarily" for that. In EN-GB, "momentarily" means "for a brief moment".
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mscha, Sciscitor and 25 guests