[2012-Nov-27] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Blame Quintushalls for this.

Moderators: NeatNit, Kimra

User avatar
Lethal Interjection
Death by Elocution
Posts: 8051
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:17 pm
Location: Behind your ear. It's magic!
Contact:

[2012-Nov-27] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Lethal Interjection »

I had quite a visceral reaction to this comic. Which is to say, that I read the equation and actually cursed out the comic. I did so further after "did you do it yet".

Seriously, this comic really shows where Zach's fanbase is, that he can put this kind of shit up there and expect anyone to give a fuck.

I mean, I don't want to be disparaging, or harken to days o'yore, but Zach has found his niche, and I am clearly not a part of it anymore.

User avatar
luolimao
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:20 am

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by luolimao »

He's going for the puerile nerd crowd.

Case in point: I am a puerile nerd, and I found this more than amusing.
(Although, honsetly, the old stuff was several orders of magnitude funnier)

plaf

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by plaf »

I didn't really put much thought into actually solving the equation (5*12.5=80), but I stopped to think about what it meant before scrolling down, and am now slightly perturbed by the fact that I guessed it :|

hmm

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by hmm »

I got ~47mph. I may have done something wrong...

Pixel
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:52 am

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Pixel »

Damn you... now I had to create an account on the forum because of that comic...

I believe wolfram alpha has the solution, as always:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%2 ... %29%2F80kg

Gila Monster
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:10 am

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Gila Monster »

Seems like we only discuss the overly nerdy comics we don't like and just ignore the funnier ones that are more like the old stuff.

Peping

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Peping »

Even funnier are the wolfram alpha speed comparisons:

Code: Select all

Jizzing in space pushes you at
~~ 0.28 × speed of the fastest garden snail (~~ 0.0028 m/s )
~~ 2 × speed of Jakobshavn Isbræ (one of the fastest glaciers) in 2003 (~~ 4×10^-4 m/s )

Mr Wright

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Mr Wright »

plaf wrote:I didn't really put much thought into actually solving the equation (5*12.5=80), but I stopped to think about what it meant before scrolling down, and am now slightly perturbed by the fact that I guessed it :|
You aren't the only one who figured it out, at first I thought of spitting but then I remembered this was SMBC not XKCD.

frankenmouse

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by frankenmouse »

I'm gonna go ahead and be a nitpicker.

The equation input to wolfram alpha [(5ml*(10^-3kg/ml)*12.5m/s)/80kg] was incorrect. The correct equation is (5ml*((e^-3)kg/ml)*12.5m/s)/80kg, with the solution being ~.0389 m/s, or roughly 82% the speed of a cassette tape.

saskia

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by saskia »

I was quite disturbed by this comic. Just recently, like 2 days ago, I was actually thinking about this, and I was actually wondering if a guy would actually be able to ejaculate in space because I wasn't sure how much force is given to the ejaculate. XD but yay smbc for putting my worries to rest.

Halinn

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Halinn »

Next up: assuming a linear speed gain, how many times would you have to wank to reach light speed?

Paradox

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Paradox »

Halinn wrote:Next up: assuming a linear speed gain, how many times would you have to wank to reach light speed?
In order for it to truely be a linear speed gain, you would have to completely rewrite the laws of physics...

However, if you somehow managed to do this, given that the speed increase is approx. 0.0389 m/s each time, with the speed of light being approx. 3X10^8 m/s

we get:

(3X10^8)/(0.0389)~7.71X10^7 times

...

You may want to pack some juice to help you keep hydrated

User avatar
Peon
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:12 pm

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by Peon »

frankenmouse wrote:I'm gonna go ahead and be a nitpicker.

The equation input to wolfram alpha [(5ml*(10^-3kg/ml)*12.5m/s)/80kg] was incorrect. The correct equation is (5ml*((e^-3)kg/ml)*12.5m/s)/80kg, with the solution being ~.0389 m/s, or roughly 82% the speed of a cassette tape.
"1e-3" is common shorthand for "1*10^(-3)". In this case the e does not refer to the base of the natural log but to the exponentiation of scientific notation.


The value I get agrees with the value obtained on Wolfram Alpha: 8*10^(-4)m/s.
Ask the next question.

User avatar
nobody
[Insert Here]
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by nobody »

"I reached for my calculator

and then I reached for my coat" - a pithy review from the new york times restaurant critic

theraven

Re: [November 27 2012] Turns out I AM a rocket scientist.

Post by theraven »

I'm pretty sure the average ejaculate is 3.2ml. I used it to calculate something last night.

Post Reply