0473: "Still Raw"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

Darkus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:58 am UTC

0473: "Still Raw"

Postby Darkus » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:05 am UTC

Image

http://xkcd.com/473/

Alt text: We actually divorced once over the airplane/treadmill argument. (Preemptive response to the inevitable threads arguing about it: you're all wrong on the internet.)

Had to break my post cherry...
Last edited by Darkus on Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:06 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
vodka.cobra
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: "" Discussion

Postby vodka.cobra » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:06 am UTC

Man, my clock must be off.
If the above comment has anything to do with hacking or cryptography, note that I work for a PHP security company and might know what I'm talking about.

Darkus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:58 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Darkus » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:06 am UTC

Mine is 6 minutes off *sigh*

User avatar
joee
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:53 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby joee » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:08 am UTC

I hate you Randall. We DO NOT need another aeroplane/treadmill discussion.
Hi glasnt.

User avatar
eleniy86
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:51 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby eleniy86 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:08 am UTC

i think it should be considered a planet. it revolves around the sun, why not? that means all the minor "dwarf planets" should just be considered planets too. that's discrimination....tsk tsk..

GrandPubah
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:09 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GrandPubah » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:08 am UTC

I still haven't decided how I feel about Pluto, but I do know the "plane on a treadmill" works. Thanks Mythbusters!

User avatar
Zaraden
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:27 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Zaraden » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:08 am UTC

The other guy missed by one second! Not that it's a race.
Let epsilon be less than zero...

User avatar
madhollywood
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 12:13 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby madhollywood » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:08 am UTC

I must concur. What are they calling pluto these days? A planetesimal or something like that?

joplju
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:48 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby joplju » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:09 am UTC

For some real fun, check out the Facebook group, "When I was Your Age, Pluto was a Planet!"

I'm a proud member...

Ruined my day when they decided poor little Pluto wasn't good enough to be a planet.

WHAT DID PLUTO EVER DO TO YOU??????

top1214
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:06 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby top1214 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:09 am UTC

I at first thought this was going to be an "elaborate" set up for a your mom/sister is hot/that's what she said joke.

I was proven pleasantly wrong. :-D

GodShapedBullet
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:59 pm UTC
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GodShapedBullet » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:10 am UTC

Don't think of it as you losing a planet.

Think of it as you gaining a dwarf planet.

Two, actually, counting Charon.

User avatar
TheHand
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 8:03 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby TheHand » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:10 am UTC

Sooooooooo last solar system.

But I wonder how many relationship ending arguments have come of this... and if one did... I would have loved to see it all come crashing down.

User avatar
sunami
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:52 am UTC
Location: Arlington. The state of Northern Virginia.

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby sunami » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:10 am UTC

Alt text wrote:We actually divorced once over the airplane/treadmill argument.

I'm convinced that everyone (fine, 99%, I'm sure some that have no idea what's going on say it too) in the 'it will fly' camp is simply trolling. Based on the fact that the subject keeps popping up in arguments, quite successfully I might add.
"You heard it here first: all my software is shitty."

GodShapedBullet
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:59 pm UTC
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GodShapedBullet » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:11 am UTC

joplju wrote:For some real fun, check out the Facebook group, "When I was Your Age, Pluto was a Planet!"


Kind of dislike that group because technically, if Pluto isn't a planet now, it wasn't a planet then.

But it's a sweet sentiment.

GrandPubah
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:09 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GrandPubah » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:12 am UTC

GodShapedBullet wrote:
joplju wrote:For some real fun, check out the Facebook group, "When I was Your Age, Pluto was a Planet!"


Kind of dislike that group because technically, if Pluto isn't a planet now, it wasn't a planet then.

But it's a sweet sentiment.


It may have been a Dwarf Planet, but all the school books and the classroom teachers taught us otherwise.

User avatar
dr7
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 3:17 am UTC
Location: Right here. You can't see me?
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby dr7 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:14 am UTC

I believe it never should have been a planet as well. I mean come on, it crosses Neptune's path, ffs. What kind of self-respecting planet does that?

User avatar
Southwest
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:01 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Southwest » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:16 am UTC

I predict that, due to this comic (and perhaps this post), this website explaining the airplane/treadmill thought experiment will see much more traffic.

As for the comic, it sure elicited a little smile from me. Not classic xkcd, in my eyes, but a nice little joke.

User avatar
glasnt
Posts: 539
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:18 am UTC
Location: SQUEE!

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby glasnt » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:17 am UTC

I had a big argument once with an ex over the treadmill stuff -_-

Also, damn you Randall, I refreshed the home page 20 times in 2 minutes, only to find it now -_-

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Steve the Pocket » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:19 am UTC

GodShapedBullet wrote:Don't think of it as you losing a planet.

Think of it as you gaining a dwarf planet.

Two, actually, counting Charon.

I don't know about this "Charon" of which you speak, but Wikipedia says there are actually four official dwarf planets now: Ceres, Eris, Pluto, and this one I've only just heard of called Makemake. :?

I'm starting to see why this demotion was a big deal. With all these new "dwarf planets" that keep popping up, and others that are apparently in dispute, bodies in that category are not likely to end up on new solar system charts at all. Pity. I was hoping kids would have to learn all eleven twelve major sun-orbiting orbs.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
vodka.cobra
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby vodka.cobra » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:19 am UTC

The whole airplane/treadmill thing is stupid. I think that if there's no displacement, there is no airflow and no takeoff.
If the above comment has anything to do with hacking or cryptography, note that I work for a PHP security company and might know what I'm talking about.

Alfonzo227
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:15 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Alfonzo227 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:20 am UTC

For those who are curious as to what the airplane-treadmill thing is, here's a link to a simple explanation that you can also find in about 5 seconds with google. I know this because that's exactly what I did a minute ago.
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/12/11/ai ... ll-pr.html

aaand the mythbusters video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbRcg3ji_Pc



EDIT: damned! Southwest beat me to it, and with better links too.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:22 am UTC

dr7 wrote:I believe it never should have been a planet as well. I mean come on, it crosses Neptune's path, ffs. What kind of self-respecting planet does that?

Your mother, sir.

Am I a loser because I had to Google airplane-on-a-treadmill?
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

GodShapedBullet
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:59 pm UTC
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GodShapedBullet » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:24 am UTC

GrandPubah wrote:It may have been a Dwarf Planet, but all the school books and the classroom teachers taught us otherwise.


I would be really surprised if this was the only piece of knowledge to become obsolete since I went to elementary school.

The only trouble for me is accepting that a dwarf planet is not a planet.

That's White Horse Paradox material there.

User avatar
SwissArmyAnts
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:43 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby SwissArmyAnts » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:24 am UTC

Actually, I hadn't heard of the "airplane on a treadmill" problem until now.

Not to start an physics debate, but it would take off, wouldn't it, unless the plane was designed to reach it's takeoff speed by using it's wheels for propulsion.

(I'm just looking for a straightforward explanation of the problem, not an argument.)
CALVINIST ARGUMENT, a.k.a. TERTULLIAN'S ARGUMENT
(1) If God exists, then he will let me watch you be tortured forever.
(2) I rather like that idea.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Darkus
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:58 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Darkus » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:25 am UTC

Alfonzo227 wrote:aaand the mythbusters video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbRcg3ji_Pc



Normally I don't like to accept much of the results that MythBusters manage to pull out, but I have to agree with this one.

As for pluto... As much as I hate to see the poor little guy get shot down, it was either demote one, or promote (what is it up to now?) three.

GAU 8 Avenger
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:16 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GAU 8 Avenger » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:25 am UTC

Commercial pilot in training here, and I just have to add my two cents.
If somehow the plane and the treadmill matched speeds the opposite direction, there will be no airflow over the wings, and the aircraft will not take off. The only way for an aircraft to take off is for it to gain enough ground speed that the speed of the air going over and under the wing is enough to cause lift, or if air is blown against the wing (in the latter scenario th plane could either be stationary or moving as well) That's why aircraft always take off into the wind, because that gives the airflow over the airfoil a speed advantage to begin with, leading to a shorter takeoff roll

User avatar
SwissArmyAnts
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:43 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby SwissArmyAnts » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:29 am UTC

Steve the Pocket wrote:
GodShapedBullet wrote:Don't think of it as you losing a planet.

Think of it as you gaining a dwarf planet.

Two, actually, counting Charon.

I don't know about this "Charon" of which you speak, but Wikipedia says there are actually four official dwarf planets now: Ceres, Eris, Pluto, and this one I've only just heard of called Makemake. :?

I'm starting to see why this demotion was a big deal. With all these new "dwarf planets" that keep popping up, and others that are apparently in dispute, bodies in that category are not likely to end up on new solar system charts at all. Pity. I was hoping kids would have to learn all eleven twelve major sun-orbiting orbs.


Charon is the moon of the former planet known as Pluto, and as it is nearly as large as Pluto itself, could be considered a dwarf planet itself.
CALVINIST ARGUMENT, a.k.a. TERTULLIAN'S ARGUMENT
(1) If God exists, then he will let me watch you be tortured forever.
(2) I rather like that idea.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

GodShapedBullet
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:59 pm UTC
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GodShapedBullet » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:31 am UTC

Makemake sounds like kind of a fake name in my opinion, Steve.

User avatar
eleniy86
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:51 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby eleniy86 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:31 am UTC

dr7 wrote:I believe it never should have been a planet as well. I mean come on, it crosses Neptune's path, ffs. What kind of self-respecting planet does that?


maybe neptune and pluto will collide someday, making it a SUPER PLANET???
what will we call it then??
uh oh lol

User avatar
eleniy86
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:51 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby eleniy86 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:32 am UTC

GodShapedBullet wrote:Makemake sounds like kind of a fake name in my opinion, Steve.


its actually named after some god, i forget which culture has a god called makemake... :-\

::EDIT:: it was an Easter Island god, the creator of everything. kinda like your everyday run-of-the-mill celestial being lol
Last edited by eleniy86 on Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:33 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Unforgiven
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:48 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Unforgiven » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:33 am UTC

SwissArmyAnts wrote:Actually, I hadn't heard of the "airplane on a treadmill" problem until now.

Not to start an physics debate, but it would take off, wouldn't it, unless the plane was designed to reach it's takeoff speed by using it's wheels for propulsion.

(I'm just looking for a straightforward explanation of the problem, not an argument.)

That is correct.

All the people who say it won't fly work on the assumption that the treadmill is successfull in stopping the aircraft going forward. If the aircraft is standing still, obviously there will not be any airflow over the wings hence no lift so it can't fly.

However, the plane won't stand still. The treadmill would only be able to keep the plane standing still if the plane was wheel-driven, as you say. But it's not. The plane's propulsion comes from the propellor or jet engines, not the wheels. So all the treadmill will succeed in doing is make the wheels spin faster. It has no effect on the plane's forward motion (or almost no effect, depending on how much friction there is in the wheel bearings; it would be negligable though).

The plane will still move forwards and it will still take off.
"Now we're at the museum. Do you think they'll have DDR in there too?"
"It's Japan. Of course they will."

pegasos989
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 7:14 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby pegasos989 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:36 am UTC

SwissArmyAnts wrote:Actually, I hadn't heard of the "airplane on a treadmill" problem until now.

Not to start an physics debate, but it would take off, wouldn't it, unless the plane was designed to reach it's takeoff speed by using it's wheels for propulsion.

(I'm just looking for a straightforward explanation of the problem, not an argument.)


Yes, yes it would.

GAU 8 Avenger wrote:Commercial pilot in training here, and I just have to add my two cents.
If somehow the plane and the treadmill matched speeds the opposite direction, there will be no airflow over the wings, and the aircraft will not take off. The only way for an aircraft to take off is for it to gain enough ground speed that the speed of the air going over and under the wing is enough to cause lift, or if air is blown against the wing (in the latter scenario th plane could either be stationary or moving as well) That's why aircraft always take off into the wind, because that gives the airflow over the airfoil a speed advantage to begin with, leading to a shorter takeoff roll


Except that it wouldn't matter.

Most airplanes don't gain their speed by their wheels rotating very fast but rather by their jet engines, which are in the air. The jet engines push the plane forward, relative to the air, which matters in the lift off. It won't matter what the wheels do. Really. Like, at all.

The only half-viable counter-argument to this is that if going directly with the question and that the treadmill rolls just as fast as the plane/wheels, the friction produced (when the wheels move on the treadmill faster than they turn) might do something bad.

It's a shame that commercial pilot training doesn't include any physics.

EDIT: Ninjaed.

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby Steve the Pocket » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:39 am UTC

eleniy86 wrote:::EDIT:: it was an Easter Island god, the creator of everything. kinda like your everyday run-of-the-mill celestial being lol

Figures. I thought the Roman pantheon was big enough they wouldn't need to dip into other ones though. :|

Actually, since this is the only time I may get to say this without being too far off topic... let me just say that I never did care for tapping "Ceres" as a name. Ceres was the goddess of vegetation and stuff, and if it were up to me, that name would have been saved for if and when we discover another planet out there somewhere that supports life.

EDIT: AAAAAAND it turns out Ceres was named way back in the olden days before Jules Verne even started speculating about space travel, much less the idea of life on other planets. Disregard. :?
Last edited by Steve the Pocket on Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:43 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
vodka.cobra
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby vodka.cobra » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:40 am UTC

Unforgiven wrote:
SwissArmyAnts wrote:Actually, I hadn't heard of the "airplane on a treadmill" problem until now.

Not to start an physics debate, but it would take off, wouldn't it, unless the plane was designed to reach it's takeoff speed by using it's wheels for propulsion.

(I'm just looking for a straightforward explanation of the problem, not an argument.)

That is correct.

All the people who say it won't fly work on the assumption that the treadmill is successfull in stopping the aircraft going forward. If the aircraft is standing still, obviously there will not be any airflow over the wings hence no lift so it can't fly.

However, the plane won't stand still. The treadmill would only be able to keep the plane standing still if the plane was wheel-driven, as you say. But it's not. The plane's propulsion comes from the propellor or jet engines, not the wheels. So all the treadmill will succeed in doing is make the wheels spin faster. It has no effect on the plane's forward motion (or almost no effect, depending on how much friction there is in the wheel bearings; it would be negligable though).

The plane will still move forwards and it will still take off.

Okay, problem solved then. Let' s move on with our lives.
If the above comment has anything to do with hacking or cryptography, note that I work for a PHP security company and might know what I'm talking about.

GodShapedBullet
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:59 pm UTC
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GodShapedBullet » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:41 am UTC

I can't believe something that was busted on Mythbusters still bothers people.

I thought that was nerd canon.

User avatar
pyroman
Posts: 346
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:35 am UTC
Location: University at Buffalo
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby pyroman » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:42 am UTC

We actually divorced once over the airplane/treadmill argument.


Curse you Randall for starting that one again. Its a very simple problem people and it all depends on your definition of the tread mill and its efforts to keep the plane stationary. Assuming the force of friction (of the wheel bearings not the tires on the tread mill) is 0 then it doesn't matter how fast the treadmill is moving. The plane will take off as the propulsion forces do not require contact with the ground. If there is enough friction from the wheel bearings that means theoretically if the treadmill is moving fast enough it will keep the plane from taking off. The one that will effect it is if you were able to put the plane in a wind tunnel. If the air is moving fast enough in the same direction that the plane is attempting to take off in then it will not take off. This is why When ever aircraft carriers engage in takeoff operations they will go full speed and be heading into the wind in order to maximize the planes relative air speed.

*edit: ninjaed several times over
Last edited by pyroman on Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:44 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1690
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby ConMan » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:44 am UTC

pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

User avatar
rwald
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:14 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby rwald » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:44 am UTC

I wouldn't go so far as to say that Pluto never should have been a planet; when it was first discovered, it was thought to be larger than we now know it to be, and the Kuiper Belt was entirely unknown. But now that we have more correct information, there's no logical justification for keeping Pluto a planet. And "because I learned it that way in elementary school" is not a logical justification, to answer that objection.

Edit: Oh, and anyone who doesn't understand airplane-on-a-treadmill after Unforgiven's excellent explanation should read it again.
Last edited by rwald on Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:46 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

nucwin
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:34 am UTC

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby nucwin » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:45 am UTC

GAU 8 Avenger wrote:Commercial pilot in training here, and I just have to add my two cents.
If somehow the plane and the treadmill matched speeds the opposite direction, there will be no airflow over the wings, and the aircraft will not take off. The only way for an aircraft to take off is for it to gain enough ground speed that the speed of the air going over and under the wing is enough to cause lift, or if air is blown against the wing (in the latter scenario th plane could either be stationary or moving as well) That's why aircraft always take off into the wind, because that gives the airflow over the airfoil a speed advantage to begin with, leading to a shorter takeoff roll


Honestly, don't tell any CFII that you believe that, particularly if you're up for a flight review. Thrust is generated via the prop or jet (not the wheels), the treadmill will continually have to increase speed to match the increasing forward speed of the aircraft, and the treadmill cannot impart enough drag to prohibit the plane from moving forward (and thus taking off) simply by matching the forward speed. In reality, one of two things will happen: The plane will take off or the wheels will fail (from spinning at 2x the forward speed of the plane).

GodShapedBullet
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:59 pm UTC
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: "Still Raw" Discussion

Postby GodShapedBullet » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:47 am UTC

In fairness, I don't think commercial pilots get a lot of training flying their planes on giant theoretical treadmills.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DwayneSa and 42 guests