Page 1 of 2

1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:32 pm UTC
by Hiferator
Image

Title text: "If you draw a diagonal line from lower left to upper right, that's the ICP 'Miracles' axis."

Ok, first question of the thread: What does ICP stand for? Wikipedia was inconclusive to me. My attempt at process of elimination ended with "International Conference on Paleoceanography", which is something Randall would reference, but doesn't seem to fit the context.

Edit: Ok, googling ICP and Miracles lead me to the song Miracles by Insane Clown Posse, which is about miracles of nature.

Edit 2: Thanks for the suggestions anyway. My mistake was assuming ICP was some sort of scientific institution that would classify events; in this case as miracles.

Now I finally know where the line "Fuckin' magnets, how do they work?" came from.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:43 pm UTC
by retrojest
Sounds like Insane Clown Posse (who had a song called "Miracles"), but I don't see how that makes any sense in an XKCD context.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:47 pm UTC
by sfmans
International Conference on Physics?
Or, in a spreadable version straight from the fridge,
I Can't believe it's not Physics?

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:47 pm UTC
by jozwa
Integrated Chemistry & Physics? A school subject.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:55 pm UTC
by gmalivuk
Wow you guys are bad at Google.

The ICP (Insane Clown Posse) song "Miracles" includes the line, "Fucking magnets, how do they work?"

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:56 pm UTC
by Hiferator
retrojest wrote:Sounds like Insane Clown Posse (who had a song called "Miracles"), but I don't see how that makes any sense in an XKCD context.


I'm assuming he's insinuating the phenomena described in that song would all be located on that diagonal.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:01 pm UTC
by Steve the Pocket
Speaking as one of the people who immediately knew what ICP was, this is an excellent example of why I hate this habit the Internet has gotten into of shortening every single goddamn proper name to its initials, regardless of who they're in the presence of. Google is useful for a lot of things, but guessing which thing a set of three seemingly random letters stands for with no further context is not one of them. And if I have to resort to Google just to decode your writing in the first place, you are probably not doing a bang-up job of communicating.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:10 pm UTC
by Hiferator
gmalivuk wrote:Wow you guys are bad at Google.


Objection! I am pretty sure none of the posters above you have used google to come up with their suggestions.

Steve the Pocket wrote:I hate this habit the Internet has gotten into of shortening every single goddamn proper name to its initials, regardless of who they're in the presence of.


Same. At least use the full name once before switching to initials.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:15 pm UTC
by gmalivuk
The top (incognito) Google result for ICP is their homepage.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:23 pm UTC
by speising
gmalivuk wrote:The top (incognito) Google result for ICP is their homepage.

For me (also incognito), it's the wikipedia disambiguation page. The images are some dudes in crazy b/w make up, though.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:32 pm UTC
by cellocgw
Steve the Pocket wrote:Speaking as one of the people who immediately knew what ICP was, this is an excellent example of why I hate this habit the Internet has gotten into of shortening every single goddamn proper name to its initials, regardless of who they're in the presence of. Google is useful for a lot of things, but guessing which thing a set of three seemingly random letters stands for with no further context is not one of them. And if I have to resort to Google just to decode your writing in the first place, you are probably not doing a bang-up job of communicating.


So you don't like TLAs [three-letter-acronyms] , huh? Then you really won't like FLTs [four-letter TLA] .

Next you'll tell us you don't know what PEBCAK, BOFH, SCUBA, IANAL, and LASER mean either :twisted:

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 6:28 pm UTC
by DanD
As others in the thread, I am at least incidentally aware of Insane Clown Posse, but they are not the first thing that comes to mind when viewing an XKCD comic. (Despite this being the 3rd such reference).

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 6:30 pm UTC
by speising
At least, now i know where the juggle elves come from.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 7:30 pm UTC
by Quizatzhaderac
International Center of Photography wrote:Fucking magnets, how do they work?
With a lot more fluids than the regular ones.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 7:58 pm UTC
by Sandor
gmalivuk wrote:Wow you guys are bad at Google.

The ICP (Insane Clown Posse) song "Miracles" includes the line, "Fucking magnets, how do they work?"

So are you saying that the responsibility for avoiding miscommunication lies entirely with the listener?

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:59 pm UTC
by qvxb
ICP = inductively coupled plasma

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 9:51 pm UTC
by da Doctah
One of the 159 hits at www.acronymfinder.com suggests "Integrated Chemistry-Physics", which does sound plausible in context. Mind you, "Intracranial Pressure" is a lot higher up the list.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 11:24 pm UTC
by rmsgrey
cellocgw wrote:Next you'll tell us you don't know what PEBCAK, BOFH, SCUBA, IANAL, and LASER mean either :twisted:


I know meanings for 4 of 5 (which may or may not involve correct expansions).

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:59 am UTC
by chridd
gmalivuk wrote:The top (incognito) Google result for ICP is their homepage.
...but knowing that ICP can stand for Insane Clown Posse, and that it's an American hip-hop duo, doesn't tell you that that's what it refers to in this context, or how it's relevant.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:06 am UTC
by gmalivuk
And? Sometimes xkcd refers to obscure stuff. Anyone savvy enough to add "miracles" to the search gets the relevant song lyrics right away.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:32 am UTC
by pogrmman
This one is great!

I, too, didn't get the ICP part (but I'm oblivious about pop culture). Either way, this is a really good comic. I think it's one of the best ones in a while.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:49 am UTC
by DanAxtell
I found comfort and validation when I saw “Quantum Mechanics” in the Danger Zone. My chemistry classes touched on quantum mechanics and I grasped none of it. I never came close to understanding the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

When I hear someone make an analogy using Heisenberg, I conclude two things:
  1. That person has never taken a course in quantum mechanics. Otherwise, they would know that such an arcane subject cannot provide a helpful analogy in ordinary conversation.
  2. They’re probably conflating the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle with the Hawthorne Effect, the other “H” thing about measuring that dates from the 1920s. The Hawthorne Effect is now more precisely called the Observer Effect, which is sometimes used to help describe the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle—but never vice versa.

I have actually had a non-Pi reason to say, “How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.”

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:13 am UTC
by serutan
Ok, first question of the thread: What does ICP stand for? [/quote]

Whether it's right or not, it made me think of this -

Image

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:23 am UTC
by Archgeek
I am permanently annoyed that Messr.s J and 2Dope are slightly more right about magnets than I'm comfortable with. You see, in a university engineering program, you take electronics and physics classes and wind up thinking about EM fields in terms of the right-hand-rule and Maxwell's equations -- that an E-field is forged of a changing B-field (or a surfeit or deficit of electrons), and a B-field is forged of a changing E-field (see Ampere's law and the reason there's no need for a luminiferous aether). And so, after a time, one's given to stop and ask -- "Wait, just how in the heck do a bunch of electrical dipoles generate a macro-scale B-field just because they're aligned? That doesn't even make sense!"

...It turns out it continues not to make sense until you learn about tensors, strange mathematical beasts of highly compressed information kinda related to Hilbert Space, in either some advanced math course or another (beyond Calc IV and Differential Eq.), or Physics for Actual Physics Majors.

cellocgw wrote:
Steve the Pocket wrote:Speaking as one of the people who immediately knew what ICP was, this is an excellent example of why I hate this habit the Internet has gotten into of shortening every single goddamn proper name to its initials, regardless of who they're in the presence of. Google is useful for a lot of things, but guessing which thing a set of three seemingly random letters stands for with no further context is not one of them. And if I have to resort to Google just to decode your writing in the first place, you are probably not doing a bang-up job of communicating.


So you don't like TLAs [three-letter-acronyms] , huh? Then you really won't like FLTs [four-letter TLA] .

Next you'll tell us you don't know what PEBCAK, BOFH, SCUBA, IANAL, and LASER mean either :twisted:

HEH, I think you mean ETLAs (Enhanced-TLAs -- keeps the four letters intact)

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 4:37 am UTC
by e8e8
This is fake wisdom. "Weird ideas about quantum mechanics" originate with physicists.

If you don't believe me: physicists among us, tell us whether an electron has a position before you measure it.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:09 am UTC
by Copper Bezel
I thought it was Extended.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:53 am UTC
by Heimhenge
DanAxtell wrote:I found comfort and validation when I saw “Quantum Mechanics” in the Danger Zone. My chemistry classes touched on quantum mechanics and I grasped none of it. I never came close to understanding the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

When I hear someone make an analogy using Heisenberg, I conclude two things:
  1. That person has never taken a course in quantum mechanics. Otherwise, they would know that such an arcane subject cannot provide a helpful analogy in ordinary conversation.
  2. They’re probably conflating the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle with the Hawthorne Effect, the other “H” thing about measuring that dates from the 1920s. The Hawthorne Effect is now more precisely called the Observer Effect, which is sometimes used to help describe the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle—but never vice versa.

I have actually had a non-Pi reason to say, “How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.”


My first class in QM the instructor began with "Forget everything you think you've learned about Newtonian mechanics. The world doesn't really work that way." Lost me on day 1. Barely scraped by with a C+. Never really connected with it.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:33 pm UTC
by pscottdv
Sandor wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Wow you guys are bad at Google.

The ICP (Insane Clown Posse) song "Miracles" includes the line, "Fucking magnets, how do they work?"

So are you saying that the responsibility for avoiding miscommunication lies entirely with the listener?


Personally, I find that figuring out the obscure references in XKCD is usually most of the fun. In this case it took me less than 5 seconds, so less fun than usual.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:35 pm UTC
by pscottdv
serutan wrote:Ok, first question of the thread: What does ICP stand for?


Whether it's right or not, it made me think of this -

Image[/quote]

Ha! We had that comic on the door to the senior physics lab all four years of my undergraduate physics program. It was next to another captioned, "My mistake was going into cosmology for the money."

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:38 pm UTC
by pscottdv
Archgeek wrote:I am permanently annoyed that Messr.s J and 2Dope are slightly more right about magnets than I'm comfortable with. You see, in a university engineering program, you take electronics and physics classes and wind up thinking about EM fields in terms of the right-hand-rule and Maxwell's equations -- that an E-field is forged of a changing B-field (or a surfeit or deficit of electrons), and a B-field is forged of a changing E-field (see Ampere's law and the reason there's no need for a luminiferous aether). And so, after a time, one's given to stop and ask -- "Wait, just how in the heck do a bunch of electrical dipoles generate a macro-scale B-field just because they're aligned? That doesn't even make sense!"

...It turns out it continues not to make sense until you learn about tensors, strange mathematical beasts of highly compressed information kinda related to Hilbert Space, in either some advanced math course or another (beyond Calc IV and Differential Eq.), or Physics for Actual Physics Majors.


The first thing I thought when I saw the comic was, "It takes *way* more years of mathematics to understand magnets than it does quantum mechanics!".

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:16 pm UTC
by peterdavidcarter
I don't know about the Intern Clown Posse, but the only appropriate song here is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzQ3eBerHfM

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:23 pm UTC
by orthogon
pscottdv wrote: "My mistake was going into cosmology for the money."

The salaries are astronomical.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:25 pm UTC
by drachefly
DanAxtell wrote:I never came close to understanding the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.


You've got to put stuff in a place. You're trying to get it bunched up, and you're trying to get it to lie flat. These two things conflict - you can't do them both perfectly.

The math is literally the same for that problem as for the HUP. Got a normalized curve, and can't minimize its spread and the spread of its first derivative all the way down to zero at the same time.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:33 pm UTC
by Soupspoon
rmsgrey wrote:
cellocgw wrote:Next you'll tell us you don't know what PEBCAK, BOFH, SCUBA, IANAL, and LASER mean either :twisted:


I know meanings for 4 of 5 (which may or may not involve correct expansions).

"Photon Emmission via Bunched/Collimated Active Kicking" , "Barrister Only From Handbook", "Submarine Contraption Used By Aquanauts", "Individual Administering Network As Limbo" and "Luser Apparently Spawned Equipment Riddles".

Unless, by some chance, I have those completely flipped!

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:09 pm UTC
by orthogon
cellocgw wrote:Next you'll tell us you don't know what PEBCAK, BOFH, SCUBA, IANAL, and LASER mean either :twisted:


Interestingly, laser is kind of the opposite of common bugbears like "PIN number" or "PAT testing" in that if you expand the acronym in context, there's something missing, because the head is the abstract noun amplification, not any kind of device.

Spoiler:
I'm actually perfectly happy with both "PAT testing" and "PIN number" (though to a lesser extent), and will explain why if necessary.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:11 pm UTC
by DanAxtell
drachefly wrote:You've got to put stuff in a place. You're trying to get it bunched up, and you're trying to get it to lie flat. These two things conflict - you can't do them both perfectly.

The math is literally the same for that problem as for the HUP.
I certainly believe what you say, but sadly, I simultaneously understand it and don't understand it.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:15 pm UTC
by peterdavidcarter
DanAxtell wrote:
drachefly wrote:You've got to put stuff in a place. You're trying to get it bunched up, and you're trying to get it to lie flat. These two things conflict - you can't do them both perfectly.

The math is literally the same for that problem as for the HUP.
I certainly believe what you say, but sadly, I simultaneously understand it and don't understand it.


Great sass commumicates before it is understood.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:38 pm UTC
by DanAxtell
peterdavidcarter wrote:Great sass is communicated before it is understood.
I had to Google that one. It turns out to be T.S. Eliot who said, "Genuine poetry can communicate before it is understood." He also described a cat that is "always on the wrong side of every door," which sounds very quantum mechanicky to me.

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 2:43 pm UTC
by kalira
Soupspoon wrote:
rmsgrey wrote:
cellocgw wrote:Next you'll tell us you don't know what PEBCAK, BOFH, SCUBA, IANAL, and LASER mean either :twisted:


I know meanings for 4 of 5 (which may or may not involve correct expansions).

"Photon Emmission via Bunched/Collimated Active Kicking" , "Barrister Only From Handbook", "Submarine Contraption Used By Aquanauts", "Individual Administering Network As Limbo" and "Luser Apparently Spawned Equipment Riddles".

Unless, by some chance, I have those completely flipped!


Well played sir, well played. *clap*

Re: 1861: "Quantum"

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:22 pm UTC
by peterdavidcarter
DanAxtell wrote:
peterdavidcarter wrote:Great sass is communicated before it is understood.
I had to Google that one. It turns out to be T.S. Eliot who said, "Genuine poetry can communicate before it is understood." He also described a cat that is "always on the wrong side of every door," which sounds very quantum mechanicky to me.


Was the MaCavity, the Mystery Cat, or was that a different one?