Page 1 of 3

0683: "Science Montage"

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:03 am UTC
by plin25
Image
Title text: The rat's perturbed; it must sense nanobots! Code grey! We have a Helvetica scenario!

Crazy movies and their unrealistic science

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:08 am UTC
by Capissen
I registered just now simply to express how awesome Randall is for making a "Look Around You" reference. For those who don't get it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY7XH2ulTEU

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:13 am UTC
by spiffytech
Bonus points for the Look Around You reference!

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:15 am UTC
by JustMe
This is AWESOME! I've spent so much of my life explaining concepts such as "margin of error". From now on, I'm just handing out copies of this comic.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:16 am UTC
by erhbr
Danger!
Helvetica!

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:16 am UTC
by acidcj
Aw, no New Year's/Decade's Comic? Also, didn't catch the reference. :(

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:20 am UTC
by westrim
Oh god, not Helvetica! Anything but Helvetica! :shock:

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:32 am UTC
by TheChewanater
Disappointing. Though, it might be because I didn't get the reference.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:39 am UTC
by XbHW_TestEngr
Nicely done. But, my non-science friends and family still won't understand.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:41 am UTC
by 10nitro
Dissapointing. The first decade of the future is now over.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:51 am UTC
by SolkaTruesilver
TheChewanater wrote:Disappointing. Though, it might be because I didn't get the reference.


you do know that you just given this comic's rant for Xkcd Sucks? Otherwise, the comic was perfect ennough that these loosers wouldn't have found flaw without making up one :-(




;-)


Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:11 am UTC
by Chicostick
The Helvetica scenario seriously terrifies me. I hope it never happens to me...

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:31 am UTC
by chridd
Chicostick wrote:The Helvetica scenario seriously terrifies me. I hope it never happens to me...

Considering that calcium is an atom, not a molecule, and that there is no such thing as a "queen atom"... I think you'll be okay.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:32 am UTC
by Amnesiasoft
chridd wrote:Considering that calcium is an atom, not a molecule, and that there is no such thing as a "queen atom"... I think you'll be okay.

No wonder I got a 1 on my AP Chem exam :(

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:54 am UTC
by Draco18s
At least you know Helvetica is a font family, right?

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:48 am UTC
by fealuinix
That video clip only raises more questions...

So we have some pseudo-science on calcium, and if the molecule falls apart...people lose their face? Seriously, what does that have to do with anything?

Unless it's instead a reference to whatever the hell that was, I'm assuming 'code grey' is in reference to grey goo.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:55 am UTC
by blackenedbutterfly
Capissen wrote:I registered just now simply to express how awesome Randall is for making a "Look Around You" reference. For those who don't get it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY7XH2ulTEU


This. This right here and then.

fealuinix - see the rest of the series for your answer.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:59 am UTC
by LtBonzai
Capissen wrote:I registered just now simply to express how awesome Randall is for making a "Look Around You" reference. For those who don't get it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY7XH2ulTEU



Wow, that faceless guy has me scarred for life. No amount of cheese burns can ever save me, now.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 9:10 am UTC
by Omegaton
Yeah, doing real science isn't like the movies...

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:50 am UTC
by Mo6eB
Randall's art makes it hard to determine, but I'm almost certain there are two men in the right half, while in the left there is a male and a female scientist.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:33 pm UTC
by Rabbethan
I don't know what was in the vial on the right but it made her lab coat see-through!

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 12:41 pm UTC
by Technical Ben
I thought only we watched here and now in the uk? It's great someone else "got it" in a humour sense. It's like a photocopy [xerox] of my old Science Video lessons at school. Only photocopied so many times that it stops making sense. It is scary that they could have been saying the exact same things at school and I'd be none the wiser. For a little while at least.

On the comic note, it needs to be much longer. Most movie science takes one hour or one day. In the real world it can take days or weeks for some things to be grown, tested or pulled apart.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:09 pm UTC
by lingomaniac88
I'm just wondering why the guy in the Actual Science Montage set of panels took off his safety goggles in the third panel.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:21 pm UTC
by You, sir, name?
"Actual Science Montage" needs to be in a room half the size, with a substandard fluorescent light, and a very noisy but ineffective ventilation. Oh, and take 4 hours longer.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:32 pm UTC
by BioTube
lingomaniac88 wrote:I'm just wondering why the guy in the Actual Science Montage set of panels took off his safety goggles in the third panel.
Considering the two-hour time skip, he was clearly busy elsewhere on just came to check on the thing. He merely brought them with him in case it had finished.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:38 pm UTC
by Stripy-Artist
Mo6eB wrote:Randall's art makes it hard to determine, but I'm almost certain there are two men in the right half, while in the left there is a male and a female scientist.


On both sides, one of the scientists has a ponytail . Be sure to take another look!

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:49 pm UTC
by You, sir, name?
Stripy-Artist wrote:
Mo6eB wrote:Randall's art makes it hard to determine, but I'm almost certain there are two men in the right half, while in the left there is a male and a female scientist.


On both sides, one of the scientists has a ponytail . Be sure to take another look!


Well, since long haire is overrepresented among scientists, and women are underrepresented among scientists, that really doesn't give any clue to the gender of either pony tailed scientist.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:04 pm UTC
by SunDawg
In the second panel of movie-science, one of the rats is on the girl's head.

That is all I have to say.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:11 pm UTC
by You, sir, name?
This is also relevant to this comic: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive ... micid=1156

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:49 pm UTC
by Technical Ben
SunDawg wrote:In the second panel of movie-science, one of the rats is on the girl's head.

That is all I have to say.


Oh My Gosh! I never noticed that! How did I not notice that...?

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:05 pm UTC
by Eikinkloster
But is the term Helvetica Scenario on Look Around You anything but random? Any reference to the fractured nature of Switzerland?

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:23 pm UTC
by santiago
I always imagine it like this. A huge room with an LHC-like machine and guys in white coats. Theres a lot of monitors around showing pointlessly stylized, moving, flashing graphs. They press a button.

-Time?
-93 seconds
-Damn, we're so close. More power
*scared looks between colleagues*
-But sir...
-I SAID MORE POWER. I know the risks damnit, we're about to lose our funding.

Then of course something goes wrong and they are taught a lesson of humility, because them scientists should have never messed with creation.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:38 pm UTC
by Foweraker
To those of you asking for an end of the decade comic, you are aware we have another 365 days of the 2000s left?

Seriously it is like the millenium all over again! The first thing you count is not 0!

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:47 pm UTC
by rcox1
The worst thing about movie science is that it tricks kids into thinking that science has that level of excitement and instant gratification. Then they get into college and realize the truth. I suspect it is the same thing for kids who got into law after watching legally blonde. I just imagine a bunch of kids thinking that there must be something more to physics than free body or Feynman diagrams. Those crafty profs must be hiding the good stuff for themselves. The kids are probably right.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:09 pm UTC
by DoctorSubmarine
Foweraker wrote:To those of you asking for an end of the decade comic, you are aware we have another 365 days of the 2000s left?

Seriously it is like the millenium all over again! The first thing you count is not 0!


A decade is a unit of time measuring 10 years.

Year 1: 2000
Year 2: 2001
Year 3: 2002
Year 4: 2003
Year 5: 2004
Year 6: 2005
Year 7: 2006
Year 8: 2007
Year 9: 2008
Year 10: 2009

Therefore, this IS the end of the decade.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:35 pm UTC
by You, sir, name?
DoctorSubmarine wrote:
Foweraker wrote:To those of you asking for an end of the decade comic, you are aware we have another 365 days of the 2000s left?

Seriously it is like the millenium all over again! The first thing you count is not 0!


A decade is a unit of time measuring 10 years.

Year 1: 2000
Year 2: 2001
Year 3: 2002
Year 4: 2003
Year 5: 2004
Year 6: 2005
Year 7: 2006
Year 8: 2007
Year 9: 2008
Year 10: 2009

Therefore, this IS the end of the decade.


It is the end of the decade that started year 2000. Obviously, you are free to arbitrarily define the start of a decade. It is most certainly not the end of the decade that started April 21 2004.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:48 pm UTC
by DoctorSubmarine
You, sir, name? wrote:
DoctorSubmarine wrote:
Foweraker wrote:To those of you asking for an end of the decade comic, you are aware we have another 365 days of the 2000s left?

Seriously it is like the millenium all over again! The first thing you count is not 0!


A decade is a unit of time measuring 10 years.

Year 1: 2000
Year 2: 2001
Year 3: 2002
Year 4: 2003
Year 5: 2004
Year 6: 2005
Year 7: 2006
Year 8: 2007
Year 9: 2008
Year 10: 2009

Therefore, this IS the end of the decade.


It is the end of the decade that started year 2000. Obviously, you are free to arbitrarily define the start of a decade. It is most certainly not the end of the decade that started April 21 2004.


Point, taken.

Anyway, loved the comic!

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:18 pm UTC
by BioTube
Foweraker wrote:Seriously it is like the millenium all over again! The first thing you count is not 0!
C would like a word with you.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:19 pm UTC
by Steve the Pocket
I'm still convinced there needs to be a band called The Helvetica Scenario. Preferably a good band, since otherwise that would be kind of embarrassing.

Re: "Science Montage" Discussion

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:21 pm UTC
by TheChewanater
Foweraker wrote:To those of you asking for an end of the decade comic, you are aware we have another 365 days of the 2000s left?

Seriously it is like the millenium all over again! The first thing you count is not 0!

Image