0957: "Development"

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

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Cynical Idealist
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:48 pm UTC

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby Cynical Idealist » Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:03 am UTC

gnoitall wrote:
ijuin wrote:
The Moomin wrote:I'm intrigued by these police radar guns that are inaccurate by over 5 days, tell me more.

I'm pretty sure you're deliberately misinterpreting the statement, but I'll explain anyway. I meant that police radar guns frequently give an error of more than 2.0 knots when measuring the speed of objects--e.g. trees being reported as actually being in motion. As such, radar is not necessarily sufficiently accurate to reduce the margin of error for measuring a hurricane's path by a great deal below the current error margins.

To pick a mediocre analogy, that's arguing that snipers can't possibly hit targets at 1000 meters and beyond because a .38 Special snub-nose pistol isn't meaningfully accurate beyond 20 meters.

The capabilities of a police radar don't meaningfully reflect at all on the capabilities of a dedicated weather-surveillance doppler radar. According to the WSR-88d System Specification document (http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/pdf/2810000C.pdf), page 3-60, velocity accuracy "will be less than or equal to 1.0 ms-1"... i.e., less than 1 meter/second.

Pretty accurate. With all post-processing and quantization effects, I expect final velocity measurement accuracy to be +/- 10 m/s, though that's just a guess. But a very conservative guess.

I should hope that's a conservative guess, since it suggests that a weather-surveillance radar is literally an order of magnitude less accurate than a police radar (10 m/s = 19 kt).
The internet removes the two biggest aids in detecting sarcasm:
1)The tone of voice
2)the assumption that the other person is sane
Elvish Pillager wrote:See? All the problems in our society are caused by violent video games, like FarmVille.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26533
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:42 pm UTC

gnoitall wrote:
ijuin wrote:I'm pretty sure you're deliberately misinterpreting the statement, but I'll explain anyway. I meant that police radar guns frequently give an error of more than 2.0 knots when measuring the speed of objects--e.g. trees being reported as actually being in motion. As such, radar is not necessarily sufficiently accurate to reduce the margin of error for measuring a hurricane's path by a great deal below the current error margins.

To pick a mediocre analogy, that's arguing that snipers can't possibly hit targets at 1000 meters and beyond because a .38 Special snub-nose pistol isn't meaningfully accurate beyond 20 meters.

The capabilities of a police radar don't meaningfully reflect at all on the capabilities of a dedicated weather-surveillance doppler radar. According to the WSR-88d System Specification document (http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/pdf/2810000C.pdf), page 3-60, velocity accuracy "will be less than or equal to 1.0 ms-1"... i.e., less than 1 meter/second.
Right. A meter per second. Also known as very nearly 2.0 knots...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

marcel
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:34 am UTC

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby marcel » Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:58 pm UTC

tgape wrote:For what it's worth, I'm a lazy bum. When I don't get an XKCD comic, rather than googling it right away, I wait until that evening or the next day, and check the forums. (Usually, the answer's already in the forums when I look at XKCD initially, but since I do that right before work, I don't really have time then.)

Exactly, why would I google it myself, if others will do it for me, without me needing to ask 8)

bigjeff5
Posts: 127
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:59 am UTC

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby bigjeff5 » Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:*Just about everything he's written in this thread so far.*


I don't visit the forums every day, but I feel like I'm in bizzarro world with SirMustapha not trashing a comic... :shock: :P

Anyway, I liked the comic too.

swiftcoder
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:18 am UTC

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby swiftcoder » Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:25 am UTC

KrytenKoro wrote:Also: "objects and their properties" being "mainly a philosophical" thing? What? I mean, maybe if you didn't know anything about babies or sentience you wouldn't think it was psychology, but...that's elementary school science class right there. Why would you think it would be philosophy instead of physics?

It's not so much that objects and their properties are the realm of philosophical study (though they are, at least to the extent of considering their existence and the human perception thereof), but more that the precise phrase "objects and their properties" reads like something one would expect to encounter in a text concerning Ontology. Maybe one by Hegel, Frege or Gödel...

bigjeff5
Posts: 127
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:59 am UTC

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby bigjeff5 » Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:03 pm UTC

swiftcoder wrote:
KrytenKoro wrote:Also: "objects and their properties" being "mainly a philosophical" thing? What? I mean, maybe if you didn't know anything about babies or sentience you wouldn't think it was psychology, but...that's elementary school science class right there. Why would you think it would be philosophy instead of physics?

It's not so much that objects and their properties are the realm of philosophical study (though they are, at least to the extent of considering their existence and the human perception thereof), but more that the precise phrase "objects and their properties" reads like something one would expect to encounter in a text concerning Ontology. Maybe one by Hegel, Frege or Gödel...


Or maybe, you know, Piaget, who was mentioned in the comic and had a set of "stages of psychological development", which had a sub-series of infant development which included the recognition of objects and their properties as the 5th stage... but maybe I'm just paying too much attention to what's in the freaking comic.

For heaven's sake people! Don't be daft! Look at what's most likely, not what you think maybe-could-possibly-fit-if-we-shoe-horn-it-this-way-and-flat-ignore-this-other-stuff. Quit defending a position for the sake of continuing an argument, it makes you look stupid. And if you really don't see how Piaget's 5 stages of infant development are relevant, you're an idiot.

Simplest answer is that he's talking about Piaget's stages of development, since, you know, he mentioned Piaget's stages of development and all. Lets go with that. It's psychology, not metaphysics. He's saying the damn storm became sentient, and people were very confused.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26533
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:16 pm UTC

Not even necessarily that it became sentient, so much as that people were rather confused when the hurricane went from having a stage (should be category, or should be about tornadoes instead) defined by windspeed to one defined by a psychological criterion.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: 0957: "Development"

Postby SirMustapha » Tue Oct 04, 2011 12:19 pm UTC

I think there's a lot more humour in the hurricane actually becoming sentient, otherwise it becomes a very lame, pointless "ha ha! I mixed two totally unrelated sciences!" non-joke. A sentient hurricane, now, could be explored a lot further.

But I guess that, since psychology is like soo "uncool", then Randall must obviously be talking about Physics. "Piaget" must be a typo or something.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests