1701: "Speed and Danger"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1762
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:44 pm UTC

Image

alt-text: NASCAR removed the passenger seats because the drivers hated how astronauts kept riding with them and saying "Ahh, what a nice relaxing drive" . <-- or something close to that.

I bet I screwed up the fristpost rules.

Just wondering why there are no points on this graph for LHC collisions.
And no points for collsions between personal worldview and reality.
Last edited by cellocgw on Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:47 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
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

finity
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 12:10 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby finity » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:47 pm UTC

Cheater :-)

Four points on a graph! Best exkayseedee yet!

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Echo244 » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:50 pm UTC

So... how controversial is Randall being by marking Formula 1 as faster and more dangerous than NASCAR? Regarding fan feelings, rather than actual hard data?
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 1944
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Flumble » Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:13 pm UTC

finity wrote:Four points on a graph! Best exkayseedee yet!

It's a shame. Where's the particle accelerator collisions, like cellocgw said? Where's the stock market (UK's for extra *)? Where's the pineapple?

I'm eagerly awaiting the XKCDSWBs.

*what-you-call-it-when-something-references-the-current-situation-ness... please help me out, (gender-unspecific) guys.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4779
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby HES » Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:17 pm UTC

Flumble wrote:*what-you-call-it-when-something-references-the-current-situation-ness...

Relevance? Topicality?
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
svenman
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:09 pm UTC
Location: 680 km NNE of the Château d'If

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby svenman » Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:42 pm UTC

I'm a little disappointed not to find a Tesla joke somewhere in there.
Mostly active on the One True Thread.
If you need help understanding what's going on there, the xkcd Time Wiki may help.

Addams didn't die! But will Addams have a place to live? You can help!

Randallspeed to all blitzers on the One True Thread!

Ego
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:29 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Ego » Fri Jul 01, 2016 3:50 pm UTC

May be it is a very meta joke about Tesla. like, it's too safe to be displayed. idk. I'm honestly confused.

User avatar
Keyman
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Keyman » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:00 pm UTC

Ego wrote:May be it is a very meta joke about Tesla. like, it's too safe to be displayed. idk. I'm honestly confused.

Maybe it's "too soon"...in both sense of the phrase. :cry:
A childhood spent walking while reading books has prepared me unexpectedly well for today's world.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:13 pm UTC

I feel like examples in each quadrant are required.

Fast and safe: LHC

Slow and dangerous: Continental plates.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

mefuller
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 5:21 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby mefuller » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:25 pm UTC

Echo244 wrote:So... how controversial is Randall being by marking Formula 1 as faster and more dangerous than NASCAR? Regarding fan feelings, rather than actual hard data?


I think it's factually wrong that F1 is faster. F1 does road courses and a lot of street circuits. To generate the downforce required for high-speed handling, the cars have lots of aerodynamic features (e.g. wings) which create a huge amount of drag and make drafting nearly impossible. NASCAR is oval racing with banked tracks (mostly). Drafting is advantageous and no one is braking to take a hairpin at 100 kph.
As far as danger, it's a toss-up. Top tier motor sports kill someone regularly, although it's a lot safer now than it's ever been. As soon as F1 goes closed-cockpit or mandates some scheme fro deflecting debris away from the driver's head, it will be the safer sport.

I also think driving a personal car on public streets should have made the chart. Slower than racing but likely way more dangerous.

richP
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:28 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby richP » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:27 pm UTC

Echo244 wrote:So... how controversial is Randall being by marking Formula 1 as faster and more dangerous than NASCAR? Regarding fan feelings, rather than actual hard data?


After some quick googling, NASCAR top speed is about 217 MPH, F1 is about 230 MPH.

Danger wise, I have no clue, I suppose one could scale based on accident and/or fatality rates per miles raced or # of events raced.

The real mind blower is to compare pit stops in NASCAR vs F1. As a 'merican used to seeing the frantic NASCAR stops (where the ratio of pit crew to lugnuts is 1:4) it's amazing to see an F1 stop (where the ratio is something like 20:1).

PsiCubed
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:13 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby PsiCubed » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:37 pm UTC

Lame and frustrating comic, especially coming from Randall. We all know what the guy could have done with the basic permise of this comic, had he decided to put even a miniscule amount of effort into it. Right?

Oh well. At least the alt-text was genuinely funny.
Image

javalsu
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:48 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby javalsu » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:50 pm UTC

Shouldn't NASCAR and formula one be in the top right quadrant for fast and safe?

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6109
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Jorpho » Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:36 pm UTC

The last (several) times something like this happened, Randall uploaded the wrong comic and the problem was remedied later in the day.

But it's well past noon EST now. This bodes poorly.

richP
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:28 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby richP » Fri Jul 01, 2016 5:47 pm UTC

Every other graph-based xkcd comic has featured numerous suggestions for what Randall "missed". He just left plenty of room for us this time.

User avatar
svenman
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:09 pm UTC
Location: 680 km NNE of the Château d'If

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby svenman » Fri Jul 01, 2016 6:05 pm UTC

Maybe the humour is supposed to come from the circumstance that ordinarily, one might expect the three data points "Normal sports", "Nascar" and "Formula One" to be spread out over the scope of a graph like this, but adding "Rocket launches" makes the other three huddle close together in one corner.

I agree that the joke seems to be a rather weak one this time, though.
Mostly active on the One True Thread.
If you need help understanding what's going on there, the xkcd Time Wiki may help.

Addams didn't die! But will Addams have a place to live? You can help!

Randallspeed to all blitzers on the One True Thread!

MrT2
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:02 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby MrT2 » Fri Jul 01, 2016 6:21 pm UTC

F1 fatalities in the last 20 years:
1 main driver (Jules Bianchi)
1 test/reserve driver (Maria de Villota, cardiac arrest but partially attributed to an accident 1 year prior)
3 drivers of historic F1 cars
at least 3 marshalls (2000 Italy, 2001 Australia, 2013 Canada - first two hit by tyres, the third hit by a crane)

NASCAR:
2 main drivers (Kenny Irwin Jr, Dale Earnhardt)
12 drivers in support series under the NASCAR brand (5 more due to medical reasons during races)
1 spectator in a support series

IndyCar is probably the worst for a single series:
8 main drivers (Scott Brayton, Jeff Krosnoff, Gonzalo Rodriguez, Greg Moore, Tony Renna - during a tyre testing session, Paul Dana, Dan Wheldon, Justin Wilson)

Not sure about marshalls/etc for NASCAR/IndyCar, as I mostly follow F1.

richP wrote:The real mind blower is to compare pit stops in NASCAR vs F1. As a 'merican used to seeing the frantic NASCAR stops (where the ratio of pit crew to lugnuts is 1:4) it's amazing to see an F1 stop (where the ratio is something like 20:1).

Youtube video of Williams' record equalling 1.92 second pit-stop in the Azerbaijan GP, very literally blink and you miss it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VCYBtx6h4g

User avatar
peewee_RotA
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby peewee_RotA » Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:20 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure that if you introduce that much rocket fuel to ANY sport it will be just as dangerous.
"Vowels have trouble getting married in Canada. They can’t pronounce their O’s."

http://timelesstherpg.wordpress.com/about/

Herbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:03 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Herbie » Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:05 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:I feel like examples in each quadrant are required.

Fast and safe: LHC

Slow and dangerous: Continental plates.


I like the way you think. I had almost the exact same reaction to this comic. Needed to make a couple of changes:

https://goo.gl/photos/A3RSppmaBrqc9yQm9

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5475
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:27 pm UTC

Four points on a graph? Two empty quadrants? Lazy.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

Omegaman
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 1:35 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Omegaman » Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:31 pm UTC

svenman wrote:Maybe the humour is supposed to come from the circumstance that ordinarily, one might expect the three data points "Normal sports", "Nascar" and "Formula One" to be spread out over the scope of a graph like this, but adding "Rocket launches" makes the other three huddle close together in one corner.

That's the point I took away. Only by including rocket launches can auto racing be in the slow/safe quadrant and cluster with curling.

It plays with the childhood expectation that the axes intersect at (0,0).

Omegaman
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 1:35 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Omegaman » Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:35 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:And no points for collsions between personal worldview and reality.

That's off the chart to the lower right.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Jul 01, 2016 10:10 pm UTC

MrT2 wrote:F1 fatalities in the last 20 years:
1 main driver (Jules Bianchi)

Add 1994 to my "I feel old" list... Just outside your bracket, but I was wondering why you didn't include Ratzenburger and Senna in your list until I checked...

JimsMaher
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby JimsMaher » Sat Jul 02, 2016 6:18 am UTC

Fast & Crashes are Safe: for Black-boxes
Slow & Crashes are Dangerous: for bugs on the highway

If the scale of safe-to-dangerous is a measure of the likelihood of fatality, then in fairness I should point out that I was once driving at about 100kph on the highway and smacked into a moth that proceded to cling onto the windshield wiper for maybe fifteen minutes until I finally came to a stop, where it flew off on its own ability.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Soupspoon » Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:00 am UTC

JimsMaher wrote:Fast & Crashes are Safe: for Black-boxes
Slow & Crashes are Dangerous: for bugs on the highway

If the scale of safe-to-dangerous is a measure of the likelihood of fatality, then in fairness I should point out that I was once driving at about 100kph on the highway and smacked into a moth that proceded to cling onto the windshield wiper for maybe fifteen minutes until I finally came to a stop, where it flew off on its own ability.

As they (more or less) say, drop a mouse down a mineshaft and after he lands he often gets up and scampers off. Drop a man down a mineshaft, he will probably break many bones, and other severe to fatal injuries. Drop a horse down a mineshaft and it will splash.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Copper Bezel » Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:23 am UTC

Falling does invoke the square-cube law once more over, though. The terminal velocity of the smaller animals is going to be much lower, and they might well reach it in a sufficiently deep mine shaft. That doesn't apply to the windshield scenario, which is more just a question of whether the victim's body has the mechanical strength to survive an impact that's capable of rapidly accelerating it to a given speed (and that happens at the bottom of the mine shaft, too, obviously, and obviously both have to do ultimately with mass per impact surface area as opposed to just the linear loss of strength per mass that happens in relation to cross-sectional areas of support structure.)
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

Ae7flux
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:45 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Ae7flux » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:23 pm UTC

Yeah, astronauts are arseholes like that. Like brain surgeons. Rocket scientists, on the other hand, are nice.
There is an x such that x entirely fails to signify just in case x lacks a specific combination of rotary and reciprocating motion.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Sableagle » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:57 pm UTC

javalsu wrote:Shouldn't NASCAR and formula one be in the top right quadrant for fast and safe?


It kind of depends on your definition of "fast." To someone racing a street-legal car down the Old Mountain Road in Misfile, 80 mph or 36 m/s is very fast. To someone flying a T1 Chipmunk, 180 mph or 80 m/s is just about fast enough to start a stall turn. Formula 1 at 230 mph is about 103 m/s. To someone in a photo-recon Spitfire, 360 mph or 161 m/s is a reasonable sort of speed to be doing. To the pilot of an airliner at 30,000 ft, that's slow ... but 360 mph on landing approach is suicidal. .45 ACP pistol bullets and .177 air rifle pellets come out around 250 m/s. 9x19 mm tends to do something more like 450 m/s out of the muzzle. 5.56x45 mm can be 700 to 1000 m/s, depending on barrel length. When you get into orbital physics and asteroid and comet impacts, numbers like 51 km/s start appearing. Even then, "0.5 m v^2" is a good enough approximation so we can call a 10 km/s satellite collision 100 times faster and thus 10,000 times more energetic than a 100 m/s car collision with the same masses involved. That's a difference like "stepping off a 10cm kerb unexpectedly" versus "stepping off a kilometre-high cliff."

Is that a lin or log speed axis, though? Where's the 0? Where are the units? What are the units? Somewhere low down and off to the left, possibly way off-image to the left, ought to be the blob for "skiing down the Vallee Blanche / Glacier du Geant and Mer De Glace," because mistakes there can result in your grandchildren coming out to collect your remains 30 years later.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Sableagle » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:59 pm UTC

Omegaman wrote:
cellocgw wrote:And no points for collsions between personal worldview and reality.

That's off the chart to the lower right.

It's off to the lower left for some people.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

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

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby cryptoengineer » Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:04 pm UTC

svenman wrote:Maybe the humour is supposed to come from the circumstance that ordinarily, one might expect the three data points "Normal sports", "Nascar" and "Formula One" to be spread out over the scope of a graph like this, but adding "Rocket launches" makes the other three huddle close together in one corner.


I think Randall is restricting things to stuff people do. If we're going to have non-vehicle examples (yeah, I suppose you could argue that a continent is a large, slow vehicle, but I wouldn't), you can then add things like the black hole mergers recently detected by gravity telescopes - where BHs of many solar masses accelerate in speed by a substantial fraction of 'c' in a fraction of a second.

That pushes almost everything else to the top left corner.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Copper Bezel » Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:54 pm UTC

Not necessarily. If you use a geometric scale with continental drift as the low end and c as the upper end, the middle position is about 1 cm/s, and everything reasonable is pushed into the left half of the right-hand quadrants.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
BoringUglyPinkEarthPony
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 9:05 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby BoringUglyPinkEarthPony » Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:31 pm UTC

Neutrinos hit the Earth at close to the speed of light, but it's so safe that it's as if the collisions never even happen :)

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Soupspoon » Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:42 pm UTC

BoringUglyPinkEarthPony wrote:Neutrinos hit the Earth at close to the speed of light, but it's so safe that it's as if the collisions never even happen :)

Come to that, photons hit at (give or take your described point of 'collision', upper atmosphere or solid/liquid surface) the speed of light and either those collisions or the lack of those collisions could be deemed dangerous, depending on circumstances.

Epod
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 10:48 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Epod » Sun Jul 03, 2016 4:11 pm UTC

Although if we were to redefine the graph's Y axis as "Danger per Mile Traveled"....

PsiCubed
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:13 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby PsiCubed » Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:29 pm UTC

I just had another thought:

Since when are rocket launches fast? I guess it depends on how we define "launch".

Fun fact:

A Saturn V rocket is about as fast as an ordinary car on a highway, when it clears the tower.
Image

helo darqness
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:46 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby helo darqness » Mon Jul 04, 2016 1:05 am UTC

I feel like the alt text is just an unattributed Mitch Hedberg nod..

“I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Can I put my feet out the window? Man, you really like Tide...”

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Copper Bezel » Mon Jul 04, 2016 2:16 am UTC

Naw, just a similar joke less well delivered.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

keldor
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:18 am UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby keldor » Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:01 am UTC

PsiCubed wrote:I just had another thought:

Since when are rocket launches fast? I guess it depends on how we define "launch".

Fun fact:

A Saturn V rocket is about as fast as an ordinary car on a highway, when it clears the tower.


Generally when I hear "rocket launch" I think of the portion from liftoff all the way until the engines are shut off in orbit. 17,500 MPH is what I would call fast.

Also, the Titan II carrying up the Gemini missions had a max acceleration of around 6G. That's enough to go from 0 to 60 MPH in just under half a second. I call that fast too.

Cars (including NASCAR and Formula 1) are limited to a bit over 1G of acceleration due to the limitations of friction between tires and the road. At high speeds, you can get as much as 3 G from the downforce in a formula 1, but at that point you'll have too much air resistance to get much forward acceleration.

User avatar
serutan
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 2:18 pm UTC
Location: Baja Arizona

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby serutan » Mon Jul 04, 2016 5:05 am UTC

Airshows/ Air Races could easily have been included ; would have been near bottom center.
For a sentient herbivore, discretion is the only part of valor. - Larry Niven

User avatar
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 1944
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: 1701: "Speed and Danger"

Postby Flumble » Mon Jul 04, 2016 9:42 am UTC

HES wrote:
Flumble wrote:*what-you-call-it-when-something-references-the-current-situation-ness...

Relevance? Topicality?

Thanks, topicality sounds like it is what I mean.

Also, this xkcd index will be the last one in a long while before we get to a new Anno title. (unless they make an Anno 1800 or Anno 2025 any time soon, but it's more likely they'll only go further into the future)


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cougar Allen and 42 guests