That’s confusing the dimensions within the concept of Spacetime [which is composed exactly of 3 spatial dimensions + a temporal dimension] with fundamental spatial dimensions. Time is never, ever considered a spatial dimension. Spacetime is all about how time and space relate to one another, especially in regards to influences caused by relative velocities, relative positions, and gravitational influences.
As far as charting spatial positions goes, time is considered a psudeo-dimension of [n+1] value. Hence, in 3-dimensional charting (that is to say, the most typical format), it’d effectively act like a 4th dimension. On the other hand, were a chart to be graphed utilizing only 2-dimensional positioning, time would take the place of the 3rd dimension. Were you for some reason wanting to determine movement within four dimensions, time would take the place of the 5th dimension.
Time does not, in fact, bear any inherent relationship to spatial positioning. (That is to say, even if someone’s mind could fluidly process 4-dimensional geometry, they wouldn’t magically obtain the ability to see through time. In fact, by way of the fact that 4d space is possible to display via computers and virtual reality, studies have already shown that humans have some degree of adaptability to processing 4d shapes and movement, with some minds being rather adept to it.) (Tesseracts are examples of actual 4th dimension geometry, for those who are interested.)
Nevertheless, time is a fundamentally important aspect in determining changes in the spatial positioning of whatever is being charted, and thus indelibly linked to spatial considerations. That is one aspect of why the misconception over time being “the fourth dimension” occurs, though misunderstanding of and misapplication of the concept of Spacetime to general terminology is the other. [Basically, time isn’t part of Spacetime because it’s inherently the fourth dimension, it’s the fourth dimension within the concept of Spacetime, because Spacetime itself is a concept that relies on that association.]
In short, time is not actually the 4th dimension, but effectively just as important as any of the three dimensions within certain contexts. While it is treated as a psudeo-spatial-dimension in charting, it’s more straightforward to just think of it as a fourth graphing point related to any determination of spatial movements [ie, a fourth “direction” of movement].
In short, it’s exactly what Kyrik said: Time isn’t the fourth [spatial] dimension, but it is considered a fourth dimension within certain contexts. Basically, unless you’re specifically discussing something within the scope of Spacetime, it will always be incorrect to refer to time as “the fourth dimension”.
More relevantly, there’s absolutely no immediate connection between the fourth dimension and time travel, even within the concept of spacetime. Spacetime is about how the passage of time and positioning and movement within space influence one another. While that focus may allow for deliberations of time travel (as that’d be a form of influence within that scope), that sort of deliberation does not directly relate to time’s placement as a fourth dimension within that context. Which is to say, if one makes a reference in regards to moving in the fourth dimension of spacetime, presumably all they’re actually saying is “and then time passed”. Same as if one was refering to movement through time in any other context.
While it may be better to phrase it as “making determinations in regards to something”, Spacetime is a concept that would go in hand with “measuring something”, and thus would fall under Kyrik’s critera just as readily as more basic geometric charting would.
In summary, there shouldn’t be anything to argue with, as far as the details of Kyrik’s statement. Kyrik wasn’t referring to Spacetime and, even if they were, their statement is structured so that it would remain true regardless (in readily discernable intent, if not by precise phrasing).
Time is essentially equal to “change.”
Time only exists insofar as events occur; even ignoring absolutely everything on a macro level, energy cools and changes state, and particles change state and location; in fact, it can be said that they create location by being.
The essential part of THIS is that events can only occur where energy and matter exist, because otherwise…what changes? What CAN change?
The flip side of this is the fact that energy and matter cannot exist _without_ changing. It is the fundamental nature of energy and particles that they move and change state. Only when you get something like a Bose-Einstein condensate can we even approach energy or matter in a non-changing state, and that is where physics-as-we-know-it breaks down and everything goes REALLY weird.
But having established that time cannot exist without change, and change cannot exist without thing TO change, and that things cannot exist without changing …you have just established that time cannot exist without space and space cannot exist without time, but in fact “space” and “time” are really just separate operations of the same integral system, and are necessarily both used to fully describe the system.
The fact that “time”, i.e. rate of change, is influenced by factors which change the nature of space, is an obvious follow-on from that.
And having said all that, there is no reason completely inherent in this to think that the spatial directions are limited to only 3, but I don’t know enough about the theories of multidimensional universes to really evaluate the plausibility.
Well, yes, entirely true. In fact, studies have shown that humans don’t naturally perceive time as a concept, it’s a socially developed construct that is heavily influenced by calculated interpretation of outside sensory data.
(Hence why some civilizations believe time moves in reverse, and why under certain stimuli, or when facing certain perception issues, humans lose clear recognition of the passing of time).
Time is just the way humans structure their perception of change (a fact that, when considered under certain scientific and philosophical determinations, actually heavily hinders the liklihood of time travel [as such considerations would require “rolling back” the entire universe, or just the state of a single object, as change would have to be reversed on all things one is attempting to revert to a previous state].
The fact that time is consistent in its progression makes it so that humans can readily adopt the concept, but it is, at heart, just a mathematical method of expressing change.
Of course, what we’re really discussing in this nesting is terminology [as far as what qualifies as a 4th dimension], not science, so this is a bit of a tangent, to begin with. 😉
I have to weigh in on Matthew’s side here. Relativistically speaking, the direction of time is dependent on the observer; various effects cause the axes to skew. We experience one (observer-dependent) dimension very differently from the other dimensions, but that doesn’t mean Minkowski spacetime isn’t truly four-dimensional.
In a simple case, if you’re moving north (in my frame of reference), then the direction that is to you “future” is to me “future and some north,” and the direction that is to you “north” is to me “north and some future.” And of course you could try to dismiss that as one of us being wrong because one of us is moving, but we’ve both got equal claim to being stationary; there is no privileged frame of reference. That’s the most fundamental concept of special relativity.
In a more complex case, according to the predictions of general relativity, there is a region around a rotating black hole called the ergosphere where the frame-dragging effect is so strong that it is impossible to not move around the black hole in the direction of its rotation. At that point, in theory the direction of “around the black hole” behaves as time and time behaves as a spacial dimension. Obviously we’ve never actually visited a rotating black hole, but in theory it gets pretty interesting around there.
Perhaps more simply: There is no “4th dimension”, though various things can be a 4th dimension depending on the context you’re dealing with.
You might be talking 3-dimensional space + time, so time would be 4th. You might be talking 4 (or higher) dimensional space, in which case the 4th would be another spatial dimension. You might be dealing with 2 dimensional space, with time functioning as a 3rd dimension.
There are at least two different types of physical dimension. Temporal dimensions, and spatial dimensions. These are similar and connected, but should never be conflated with one another, it just causes confuses.
For instance, 4-dimensional space-time could consist of 3 spatial dimensions + 1 temporal dimension (like we have), or 2+2, or even 1+3. Each type of space-time would behave in drastically different ways.
(Although personally, I believe that our time is actually not 1-dimensional at all, but 2 or maybe even 3-dimensional, and travel to alternate timelines would be equivalent to simply moving “sideways” or “up” or whatever in one of the other temporal dimensions, instead of just forwards…)
No no, 4D chess involves an imaginary fourth spatial dimension. Indeed, this is expansible to n-dimensional chess, though strategy gets increasingly difficult to understand for puny human brains.
I mean, the fourth spatial dimension isn’t imaginary, any more than man-made minerals are. It’s not naturally occuring in nature [that we’re aware of], but we can already fully create it [utilizing computers]. Likewise, as I noted above, studies have shown that some humans can process 4-dimensional movement adeptly, so it’s not really at a lovecraftian mind-blowing level.
(In fact, if you want to test your own aptitude, there are several 4D games available out there, and I believe most of them are free to download: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_four-dimensional_games )
Regular chess is just 2D since the pieces only move in 2 dimensions. 3D chess would be like Star Trek’s Tri-D chess with multiple levels, so I guess in 4D chess, the pieces either move through portals or can move through time, I guess.
Nah, that’s just playing chess with a 1970s R&B, Pop, and Soul music group. Great harmonies while they sing “Age of Aquarius”; so great you get lost in it and forget to make your move.
In one Star Trek novel, 4-D chess is invented as a variation on 3-D chess where pieces can be “timed out” and disappear from the board, reappearing later at a time of the player’s choosing.
In one game, McCoy times his pieces to reappear on the same squares as some of Spock’s pieces, mutually annihilating them and leaving himself in a superior tactical position in what Spock comes to refer to as “kamikaze chess.”
I did not have to Google, but that’s because I remember Eros(romantic love) and Philia(sibling love), and I know I can never remember the words for Love of God by man and Man by God(Agape) and shows of affection to one’s countrymen/hospitality(Xenia). Process of elimination.
Dorothy is the coolest rebel in this comic strip. In a world of cynicism and disenchantment, Dorothy dares to actively work for a better world through organized action.
Becky, I think you should find another plan for trying to inspire voters to vote for Robin because your current method is shall we say lacking in finesse. Though honestly, what is a better way for her to do this at this point?
Also, I know Becky is worried about her lesbian cred specifically, but I wonder if she’s thought about it impacting her cred in general when her plan is specifically targeting people she knows and may continue to be in contact with with “Vote for Robin!”
Like, if she tried to convince strangers, at least she wouldn’t have to necessarily see them again later.
But she doesn’t actually think Robin can win nor does she want her to and she’s actively trying to just give the appearance that she’s working to justify her salary.
… isn’t all chess played in the 4th dimension? That is, assuming that the 4th dimension in question is time. I understand there is some debate about that.
But yeah, even “2d” chess is played through time. There’s the position of the pieces at the start, and theirs the position at any time throughout and at the end.
Which means that so called “3d chess” is a misnomer since it was always 4d chess all along.
Eh, it’s just a mathematical re-indexing that will always be viable no matter how many dimensions we have. It’s only really powerful when dealing with continuums of data rather than discrete data. (You can use it with discrete data, but there are far easier ways to handle such data.) Since every computer we’ve ever built runs on discrete data, we’d have to imagine some bizarre machine running on mind-bending principles… in which case, why not just imagine a machine with 3D, 4D, 5D, or so on storage and computation? It also doesn’t allow for homotopic equivalence, which is a feature the designers of a simulation would really want in such a mapping.
In other words, nothing about it points specifically to a simulation, and nothing about it would be particularly useful in making a simulation.
I just find it strange that her primary reason for not voting for Robin, that she states right away, is “my parents don’t like her”. I’m sure she has good personal reasons to not like Robin, but why is her first priority what her parents think?
The title plus the hover text made me laugh really hard. Your comic panels are always good, but for some reason the combo going on here hit me very hard. Thanks for making me laugh: don’t do that very often anymore.
I think she mentioned in one of the earlier comics how she’s tried and tried again to push her sister to not being monstrous politically only to have it fail and for her sister to twist what she said into her own priorities.
So, I can definitely see her coming from a “there’s no there there” perspective even if she believes Becky to be trying to change Robin.
Also, I don’t know if I could see Roz doing that to Becky; it’d be a bit hypocritical, and for all her faults, I don’t think Roz is a hypocrite. She doesn’t hold other people to standards she doesn’t live up to — in fact, her problem is that sometimes the standards she lives up to just won’t work for others.
At least that’s my take on her. Could be miles off, she’s never really gotten that much focus and it’s been a while since she had any.
It’s also a common sentiment, for someone to say they hate their parents, so Carla is likely used to being in the minority for liking hers at least since high school. You could go a lot of places and make that statement and not have anyone look at you weird.
Also, some of the bad parent behavior in this comic has been very public so some of this she knows for a fact.
I’m a bit confused. Is “voting for the same party as your parents simply because you like said parents” a thing in us? In my country, we are encouraged to make our own decision. In school, we talked about election campaigns and programs of the parties so that everyone got an idea of what each party currently wants. And we have to keep track of a bit more parties than two.
I mean, yes and no. A lot of people wind up not especially politically inclined due to apathy or comfort or monetary pressure or a great deal of other factors so they wind up taking in very baseline understanding of politics influenced by the institutions and such around them-school history, political ads, and of course Parents. And how your parents feel will generally affect how you feel if only that you’re learning from them. Obviously many people wind up going against their parents on this too.
I’m in eu and we just had a really big election. The votes of young people were different from the older generations in my country. Very different. The environment party won by far in the age slot 18-30. In total, they are almost 10% behind the winner. The party who won the whole thing got 13% with those under 30.
Not once in my life have I voted for the same party my parents voted for just because it is what they did. They actually didn’t tell me what they will do with their cross unless I specifically asked. They always wanted me to be a responsible adult and to have my own, informed opinion.
This is sooo weird to imagine.
I mean, it is probably different when there is only two choices. Like, there isn’t much of a middle term. You either agree with your parents our you actively votes the exact opposite of what they want.
Becky isn’t going to get anyone to vote for Robin in that building: Joyce opposes her homophobia, Sal doesn’t care about politics, Dorothy is liberal, Sarah is too grumpy to care about dumb stuff, Amber is already busy dealing with her mental problems, everyone else is either an LGBT person (Mandy, Grace, Sierra, Ruth, Carla), or they just hate the politics of Robin (Roz). Even Mary has stated her disappointment at Robin. Maybe Becky can have luck either promoting a new independent/humanitarian fake image for Robin, or get the vote of neckbeards and other internet scumbags.
That’s gonna be a fun conversation, Becky telling Joyce to vote for Robin. Plus the ‘woot you’re not in church’ thing. Becky is totally running into Joyce on the way out, isn’t she.
…Yes, and if she were cis, they’d just be normal great parents. It really bugs me that we live in a world where “doesn’t hate their trans kid” is enough to make parents awesome.
[soapbox]
Me: “A gay friend called me an ally today for expressing sympathy about the Pulse shooting. That shouldn’t be enough to make me an ally!”
My wife: “I think you’re an ally. You went to Frank and John’s wedding.”
Me: “Noooo! That is also too low a bar!”
[soapbox continues]
I read a story on Quora about a Black man who got run out of his community by a police officer with a gun – someone had called him in for breaking into his own car. And I realized – there are some communities where that shit happens, and some where it doesn’t happen. But where are the communities where the racists are actively forced to physically move out of the community? I’ve never heard of that happening even once ever anywhere. And it should!
We’ll know we have reached racial equality when someone transcribes a show that or book that’s about racism but uses stand ins for race, and it takes a history scholar to get that it was commenting on racism from the recent past and present of the time it was published.
To be fair I get the impression that Carla’s parents were pretty awesome and that fact that they fully supported her being a girl and sisnn’t slack on being awesome in other ways because of that upgraded them to awesome.
After today, I suspect that Becky can tell Robin that her problem isn’t her platform as much as she is perceived to be an empty suit with a smile on top.
Yeah, it is also a bit of meta-commentary from Carla that Willis tends to write bad parents by default and has to consciously choose to write good parents.
Not sure why you think that.
Robin’s original platform was enough to turn off pretty much all of this floor (except Mary, who didn’t like her because she was an unmarried (and thus presumably lesbian) Catholic), but it was also enough to get her elected with plenty of rural support.
Now she’s reversed that and lost most of her original base, but that history means no one here is likely to trust her new platform.
man, it’s probably rude to criticize the art but I…I really hate the thing Willis has started doing recently with Becky’s hair where he’ll draw her in profile from the right and her WHOLE face is covered with hair and drawn through it, like in panel 3 here. like, it legitimately creeps me out, I have no idea why? having an eye or part of her mouth showing is totally fine, but gradually her hair has fallen more and more in her face until the whole thing is covered like that and I find it SO uncomfortable to look at. it…actually kinda makes my skin crawl, lmao. is this some weird new phobia that my brain has invented? thanks brain, I hate it.
I don’t think criticism is rude, as long as it’s constructive – or at least, not “I don’t like this change for me immediately!”
That said, I get bothered whenever a character talks with their eyes closed. I know it’s a standard artistic convention and not Willis’ invention… but no one in real life closes their eyes in the middle of a conversation. It’s just not natural.
I think the eyes-closed-while-talking is more of a visual symbol of unconcern. Comics and other visual art use lot of those symbols that don’t actually appear in real life. For example, hardly anyone who is surprised actually has an exclamation point growing out of their head. And don’t get me started on the mess that would result from all those word balloons floating around.
I mean, it might be. But it just draws me out of the moment – ‘this person isn’t even looking at the person they’re speaking to. What if a bird flies at them?’
It also depends on the style and comic format. I will have different standards for say, Garfield and Uncanny X-men. At a certain level of ongoing story and involved drama, cartoony conventions become less acceptable, in my opinion.
the first time I can remember it happening with the whole face was about two months ago, in this strip. before then it seems like there was always at least a BIT of nose or chin peeking out. i scrolled through several pages of the becky tag to check my memory but it’s entirely possible he’s done it earlier than that.
either way, it just weirds me right the hell out. idk.
Liking and respecting your parents doesn’t mean you have to follow their political ideals exactly, Carla.
If you parents like and respect you, they should have no problem if you don’t.
Bear in mind, two weeks ago Robin was actively campaigning against LGBT rights. I’m guessing that has something to do with Carla’s parents spending thousands on her opponent.
She’s aware. That’s why she comments about rebelling by actually liking her parents instead of reflexively doing the opposite.
But by commenting about her parents instead of her beliefs she can make it seem like she doesn’t care about politics and not get drawn into explaining why she’s personally against Robin. Because “too cool to care” and “not going to tell the fundie about being trans”.
All good points.
Although I’d personally arguing not caring about politics isn’t ‘cool’ and blindly following your parents political ideals (or appearing to) makes you a mindless sheep…
I like my parents even though they are more likely to benefit from supporting Robin as big company owners, they chose to back her opponent instead because they care more about me.
I refuse to consult google on general principles. I’m just going to assume that while she’s going through the motions, Becky is looking for a storge room that could hold a bed that was displaced by a giant dino-plushie.
I wouldn’t take that line too seriously, considering it was from Tywin Lannister – if he understood people half as well as he thought he did, he would be alive, his children wouldn’t be psychological wrecks and his legacy wouldn’t be crumbling.
When I started reading this comic, I didn’t like Carla very much. I thought she was mean. But dang she grew on me fast. One of my favourite characters nowdays.
Imagine being such a cool, rebel individualist that you choose to be a conformist in a society that consists of and values individualism. Wouldn’t that make one MORE unique?
I just thought: Might Roz be the tutor in canvassing skills that Becky never knew was available? It seems like the scion of a political family like she is might know the basics even if she has no interest in politics herself.
Au contraire, Alt-Text, I happen to already know what ‘storge’ means.
Well, sorta.
I recall storge being one of the Greek words for love, and was able from context to deduce it refers to familial love.
Correct; Greek has multiple words that are only partially-correctly translated ‘love’. For example, probably the most famous is ‘agapé’, which is semi-correctly translated ‘charity’ in most translations of the New Testament but is more accurately defined as positive, caring and even self-sacrificing behaviour motivated by an intellectual determination to do good towards someone.
Does Carla have motorized roller sandals? Where is the propulsion system. Did she just invent some radical new micro-miniaturized technology just to power her skates???
Loading ...
I forget now if Becky is or is not trying to do a good job
Carla invented a whole other dimension for the chess she’s playing
Are you saying Carla invented time itself?
…I’m fine with that.
Yeah, the three great founders of Time Lord society are Rassilon, Omega, and Carla.
Huh. Most theories claim that “the Other One” was y-
SHENANIGANS DETECTED. EXTERMINATE SKATING HUMANOID! EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!
Delete! Delete! Delete!
But did she go back in time to do that or was there something more to it that has not yet been discovered by even the greatest of Time Lords?
The 4th dimension isn’t time, though from a math stand point you can use time as a 4th dimension when measuring something.
On the contrary, general relativity doesn’t work unless space and time function as different measures of the same 4-dimensional event.
That’s confusing the dimensions within the concept of Spacetime [which is composed exactly of 3 spatial dimensions + a temporal dimension] with fundamental spatial dimensions. Time is never, ever considered a spatial dimension. Spacetime is all about how time and space relate to one another, especially in regards to influences caused by relative velocities, relative positions, and gravitational influences.
As far as charting spatial positions goes, time is considered a psudeo-dimension of [n+1] value. Hence, in 3-dimensional charting (that is to say, the most typical format), it’d effectively act like a 4th dimension. On the other hand, were a chart to be graphed utilizing only 2-dimensional positioning, time would take the place of the 3rd dimension. Were you for some reason wanting to determine movement within four dimensions, time would take the place of the 5th dimension.
Time does not, in fact, bear any inherent relationship to spatial positioning. (That is to say, even if someone’s mind could fluidly process 4-dimensional geometry, they wouldn’t magically obtain the ability to see through time. In fact, by way of the fact that 4d space is possible to display via computers and virtual reality, studies have already shown that humans have some degree of adaptability to processing 4d shapes and movement, with some minds being rather adept to it.) (Tesseracts are examples of actual 4th dimension geometry, for those who are interested.)
Nevertheless, time is a fundamentally important aspect in determining changes in the spatial positioning of whatever is being charted, and thus indelibly linked to spatial considerations. That is one aspect of why the misconception over time being “the fourth dimension” occurs, though misunderstanding of and misapplication of the concept of Spacetime to general terminology is the other. [Basically, time isn’t part of Spacetime because it’s inherently the fourth dimension, it’s the fourth dimension within the concept of Spacetime, because Spacetime itself is a concept that relies on that association.]
In short, time is not actually the 4th dimension, but effectively just as important as any of the three dimensions within certain contexts. While it is treated as a psudeo-spatial-dimension in charting, it’s more straightforward to just think of it as a fourth graphing point related to any determination of spatial movements [ie, a fourth “direction” of movement].
In short, it’s exactly what Kyrik said: Time isn’t the fourth [spatial] dimension, but it is considered a fourth dimension within certain contexts. Basically, unless you’re specifically discussing something within the scope of Spacetime, it will always be incorrect to refer to time as “the fourth dimension”.
More relevantly, there’s absolutely no immediate connection between the fourth dimension and time travel, even within the concept of spacetime. Spacetime is about how the passage of time and positioning and movement within space influence one another. While that focus may allow for deliberations of time travel (as that’d be a form of influence within that scope), that sort of deliberation does not directly relate to time’s placement as a fourth dimension within that context. Which is to say, if one makes a reference in regards to moving in the fourth dimension of spacetime, presumably all they’re actually saying is “and then time passed”. Same as if one was refering to movement through time in any other context.
While it may be better to phrase it as “making determinations in regards to something”, Spacetime is a concept that would go in hand with “measuring something”, and thus would fall under Kyrik’s critera just as readily as more basic geometric charting would.
In summary, there shouldn’t be anything to argue with, as far as the details of Kyrik’s statement. Kyrik wasn’t referring to Spacetime and, even if they were, their statement is structured so that it would remain true regardless (in readily discernable intent, if not by precise phrasing).
My rather simpler take on this:
Time is essentially equal to “change.”
Time only exists insofar as events occur; even ignoring absolutely everything on a macro level, energy cools and changes state, and particles change state and location; in fact, it can be said that they create location by being.
The essential part of THIS is that events can only occur where energy and matter exist, because otherwise…what changes? What CAN change?
The flip side of this is the fact that energy and matter cannot exist _without_ changing. It is the fundamental nature of energy and particles that they move and change state. Only when you get something like a Bose-Einstein condensate can we even approach energy or matter in a non-changing state, and that is where physics-as-we-know-it breaks down and everything goes REALLY weird.
But having established that time cannot exist without change, and change cannot exist without thing TO change, and that things cannot exist without changing …you have just established that time cannot exist without space and space cannot exist without time, but in fact “space” and “time” are really just separate operations of the same integral system, and are necessarily both used to fully describe the system.
The fact that “time”, i.e. rate of change, is influenced by factors which change the nature of space, is an obvious follow-on from that.
And having said all that, there is no reason completely inherent in this to think that the spatial directions are limited to only 3, but I don’t know enough about the theories of multidimensional universes to really evaluate the plausibility.
“Time is essentially equal to “change.””
Well, yes, entirely true. In fact, studies have shown that humans don’t naturally perceive time as a concept, it’s a socially developed construct that is heavily influenced by calculated interpretation of outside sensory data.
(Hence why some civilizations believe time moves in reverse, and why under certain stimuli, or when facing certain perception issues, humans lose clear recognition of the passing of time).
Time is just the way humans structure their perception of change (a fact that, when considered under certain scientific and philosophical determinations, actually heavily hinders the liklihood of time travel [as such considerations would require “rolling back” the entire universe, or just the state of a single object, as change would have to be reversed on all things one is attempting to revert to a previous state].
The fact that time is consistent in its progression makes it so that humans can readily adopt the concept, but it is, at heart, just a mathematical method of expressing change.
Of course, what we’re really discussing in this nesting is terminology [as far as what qualifies as a 4th dimension], not science, so this is a bit of a tangent, to begin with. 😉
Y’all could’ve just said “time makes calculus possible”.
I’m gonna go down to N’Awwleens and open a bar called the “Delta T”.
But then we’d have to directly reference Calculus.
Pretty sure that’d require a trigger warning. 😛
I have to weigh in on Matthew’s side here. Relativistically speaking, the direction of time is dependent on the observer; various effects cause the axes to skew. We experience one (observer-dependent) dimension very differently from the other dimensions, but that doesn’t mean Minkowski spacetime isn’t truly four-dimensional.
In a simple case, if you’re moving north (in my frame of reference), then the direction that is to you “future” is to me “future and some north,” and the direction that is to you “north” is to me “north and some future.” And of course you could try to dismiss that as one of us being wrong because one of us is moving, but we’ve both got equal claim to being stationary; there is no privileged frame of reference. That’s the most fundamental concept of special relativity.
In a more complex case, according to the predictions of general relativity, there is a region around a rotating black hole called the ergosphere where the frame-dragging effect is so strong that it is impossible to not move around the black hole in the direction of its rotation. At that point, in theory the direction of “around the black hole” behaves as time and time behaves as a spacial dimension. Obviously we’ve never actually visited a rotating black hole, but in theory it gets pretty interesting around there.
Perhaps more simply: There is no “4th dimension”, though various things can be a 4th dimension depending on the context you’re dealing with.
You might be talking 3-dimensional space + time, so time would be 4th. You might be talking 4 (or higher) dimensional space, in which case the 4th would be another spatial dimension. You might be dealing with 2 dimensional space, with time functioning as a 3rd dimension.
There are at least two different types of physical dimension. Temporal dimensions, and spatial dimensions. These are similar and connected, but should never be conflated with one another, it just causes confuses.
For instance, 4-dimensional space-time could consist of 3 spatial dimensions + 1 temporal dimension (like we have), or 2+2, or even 1+3. Each type of space-time would behave in drastically different ways.
(Although personally, I believe that our time is actually not 1-dimensional at all, but 2 or maybe even 3-dimensional, and travel to alternate timelines would be equivalent to simply moving “sideways” or “up” or whatever in one of the other temporal dimensions, instead of just forwards…)
@Yet_One_More_Idiot
That’s a rather fun way of looking at time travel, thanks for bringing it up. 🙂
No no, 4D chess involves an imaginary fourth spatial dimension. Indeed, this is expansible to n-dimensional chess, though strategy gets increasingly difficult to understand for puny human brains.
I mean, the fourth spatial dimension isn’t imaginary, any more than man-made minerals are. It’s not naturally occuring in nature [that we’re aware of], but we can already fully create it [utilizing computers]. Likewise, as I noted above, studies have shown that some humans can process 4-dimensional movement adeptly, so it’s not really at a lovecraftian mind-blowing level.
(In fact, if you want to test your own aptitude, there are several 4D games available out there, and I believe most of them are free to download: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_four-dimensional_games )
If we say the fourth dimension is time, isn’t she just playing regular chess? Assuming the 4th dimension is the time that passes while playing?
Regular chess is just 2D since the pieces only move in 2 dimensions. 3D chess would be like Star Trek’s Tri-D chess with multiple levels, so I guess in 4D chess, the pieces either move through portals or can move through time, I guess.
Then what of 5D chess? Is it just chess on motorcycles?
Nah, that’s just playing chess with a 1970s R&B, Pop, and Soul music group. Great harmonies while they sing “Age of Aquarius”; so great you get lost in it and forget to make your move.
Only if chess says “fuck.”
i see what you did there Tacos. though, by the end, wasn’t it 6D’s?
6D chess is rolling a standard six-sided die to determine your movements.
32D is a specific move in strip chess.
Which move is that?
The one right before 32DD.
They move on a “fourth axis”, which of course is represented only mathematically due to the limitations of your universe.
In one Star Trek novel, 4-D chess is invented as a variation on 3-D chess where pieces can be “timed out” and disappear from the board, reappearing later at a time of the player’s choosing.
In one game, McCoy times his pieces to reappear on the same squares as some of Spock’s pieces, mutually annihilating them and leaving himself in a superior tactical position in what Spock comes to refer to as “kamikaze chess.”
Just thought i’d mention that.
Used as a foreshadowing for some starship combat later on in the same novel, IIRC (AID).
She’s counting on herself to do a bad job but isn’t actively sabotaging it.
the appearance of trying, was her exact words. This IS a webcomic about school, afterall
It doesn’t matter if you win or lose, just if you trick them into thinking you’re actually trying.
She forgets, too.
Storge is familial love, right? Working from memory here.
Had to google and yes, you are correct.
I’d assumed it had to do with the 4D chess thing, but nah.
I did not have to Google, but that’s because I remember Eros(romantic love) and Philia(sibling love), and I know I can never remember the words for Love of God by man and Man by God(Agape) and shows of affection to one’s countrymen/hospitality(Xenia). Process of elimination.
And here I thought Storge was one of the Decepticons that Unicron rebuilt. Or maybe one of the Red October Guard in G.I. Joe. That’s the ticket!
The partner of agape (divine love/charity), philia (love of friends) and eros (romantic/sexual love)…
Carla, that puts you in the same league as Dorothy.
Cool rebel you are not.
Dorothy, who bucks all the social conventions and standards of her peers and age group in order to seize the future and right the wrongs of society?
…. oh, wait, COOL rebel. I think that means you have to conform to social conventions?
No, a cool rebel is someone who’s involved in a rebellion north of the Arctic Circle (or south of the Antarctic, I guess).
No, that’s a polarized rebel.
Isn’t a polarized rebel one who’s placed between two giant magnets, so that you need to wear sunglasses to comfortably look at them?
So you’re saying it’s impossible to be a cool rebel? Don’t tell Dorothy that, she’d never stop trying for it.
“Let’s all be different, same as me!”
<3 <3 <3
Dorothy is the coolest rebel in this comic strip. In a world of cynicism and disenchantment, Dorothy dares to actively work for a better world through organized action.
I like how we actually need to have “So that’s a yes?” asked about this.
Of course, this makes Carla the rebel.
Becky, I think you should find another plan for trying to inspire voters to vote for Robin because your current method is shall we say lacking in finesse. Though honestly, what is a better way for her to do this at this point?
Probably more social media memes. It’s what got her hired in the first place.
Also, I know Becky is worried about her lesbian cred specifically, but I wonder if she’s thought about it impacting her cred in general when her plan is specifically targeting people she knows and may continue to be in contact with with “Vote for Robin!”
Like, if she tried to convince strangers, at least she wouldn’t have to necessarily see them again later.
This is a good point, she may do more lasting damage to her relationships in general than if she just campaigned to randos.
It’s a possibility. Roz sabotaging her sister made her more popular with her floor mates.
But she doesn’t actually think Robin can win nor does she want her to and she’s actively trying to just give the appearance that she’s working to justify her salary.
Carla continues to be awesome.
are
are those skate sandals
Strap-on skates are sandals with wheels. Sort of. Kind of.
Yes? I had a pair when I was a kid…
THOSE ARE REAL?!
They sure are!
Baby Marcie had a pair too: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/comic/book-7/01-glower-vacuum/landed/
Skandals
Underrated comment.
In this strip they appear to be MOTORIZED skate sandals — she’s not even moving her legs! Carla has all the best stuff.
My parents have also often been good, at least in comparison to those of some of my friends.
My friends’ parents suck, y’all.
I love you Carla. <3
… isn’t all chess played in the 4th dimension? That is, assuming that the 4th dimension in question is time. I understand there is some debate about that.
But yeah, even “2d” chess is played through time. There’s the position of the pieces at the start, and theirs the position at any time throughout and at the end.
Which means that so called “3d chess” is a misnomer since it was always 4d chess all along.
But it can all be mapped to 2d.
Which makes me think interesting thoughts about the “it’s all a giant simulation” hypothesis.
Eh, it’s just a mathematical re-indexing that will always be viable no matter how many dimensions we have. It’s only really powerful when dealing with continuums of data rather than discrete data. (You can use it with discrete data, but there are far easier ways to handle such data.) Since every computer we’ve ever built runs on discrete data, we’d have to imagine some bizarre machine running on mind-bending principles… in which case, why not just imagine a machine with 3D, 4D, 5D, or so on storage and computation? It also doesn’t allow for homotopic equivalence, which is a feature the designers of a simulation would really want in such a mapping.
In other words, nothing about it points specifically to a simulation, and nothing about it would be particularly useful in making a simulation.
Duuude. I’ve seen people misspell “discreet” so much lately that seeing actual proper use of “discrete” is sending false alarms. Feels weird. 🙂
Liking your parents doesn’t mean you have to blindly follow their political choices, but ok
I think it’s more that Becky implies she should blindly do the opposite, and Carla is correcting her.
Yea, I dont see much of a reason that she would vote for Robin in the first place, so I dont think this is blindly following her parents.
I just find it strange that her primary reason for not voting for Robin, that she states right away, is “my parents don’t like her”. I’m sure she has good personal reasons to not like Robin, but why is her first priority what her parents think?
Maybe it isn’t? She doesn’t want to explain to Becky that she’s not voting for Robin because she’s trans and Robin is an existential threat.
And in this case, it’s very likely the reason her parents donate so strongly against her is the same.
The title plus the hover text made me laugh really hard. Your comic panels are always good, but for some reason the combo going on here hit me very hard. Thanks for making me laugh: don’t do that very often anymore.
Yes, yes, Carla. You are very cool. Now scoot over and let me see Roz loose her shit
Right there in the hallway? That’s nasty. And unsanitary.
Don’t worry, Agatha will clean it as soon as she’s done unclogging. I asked and she said “okay”.
If you just loose your shit in the middle of a hallway, you probably need more fiber.
Dammit, Roz would try and shame Becky for not forcing Robin to actually be progressive, wouldn’t she?
…then again, she’d probably know better than anyone how much Robin’s promises are worth.
Also, I just pictured Carla hanging out with Marvel’s Runaways.
Comic version or show version?
Comic. I’m nostalgic like that.
(Also I don’t have Hulu.)
Wooo. I loved the comic, but I couldn’t get into the show.
I think she mentioned in one of the earlier comics how she’s tried and tried again to push her sister to not being monstrous politically only to have it fail and for her sister to twist what she said into her own priorities.
So, I can definitely see her coming from a “there’s no there there” perspective even if she believes Becky to be trying to change Robin.
Hi Cerberus!!!
Also, I don’t know if I could see Roz doing that to Becky; it’d be a bit hypocritical, and for all her faults, I don’t think Roz is a hypocrite. She doesn’t hold other people to standards she doesn’t live up to — in fact, her problem is that sometimes the standards she lives up to just won’t work for others.
At least that’s my take on her. Could be miles off, she’s never really gotten that much focus and it’s been a while since she had any.
I really love Carla’s color palette.
She just seems like she’d be cherry cola flavor if she were a gummi.
Oh dang, sounds like Carla’s been reading the comic!
… I’m sure it’s just to stay three steps ahead, and not because she’s concerned about anyone or anything.
It’s also a common sentiment, for someone to say they hate their parents, so Carla is likely used to being in the minority for liking hers at least since high school. You could go a lot of places and make that statement and not have anyone look at you weird.
Also, some of the bad parent behavior in this comic has been very public so some of this she knows for a fact.
I can’t edit or delete this.
– wants to keep family bonds
– has reoccurring thoughts lately about being trans
– could pull off the look
Wonder if I am a hidden Carla.
be the carla you want to see in the world
+1
She’s trying her best and that’s all I could ask of the girl. You earn that paycheck, Becky!
Becky throwing Robin’s campaign by very poorly canvassing door-to-door (in the Freshman dorm at a university) is fantastic.
I feel sorry for Rachel. She doesn’t deserve to be known as “Other Rachel.” Aw, damn, even in the tags?
Carla continues to be excellent.
Roz is an antimatter bomb about to go off and h’oh boy it’s gonna be big.
Other Rachel would only vote for Other Robin.
Totally engulfed Becky head from the third panel neeeeeds to be a gravatar.
I’m a bit confused. Is “voting for the same party as your parents simply because you like said parents” a thing in us? In my country, we are encouraged to make our own decision. In school, we talked about election campaigns and programs of the parties so that everyone got an idea of what each party currently wants. And we have to keep track of a bit more parties than two.
My mom would probably be very upset with me if I ever voted anything other than democrat. I’m sure it varies from household to household.
I understood it more as “not blindly voting the opposite of your parents ‘because rebellion'”.
I mean, yes and no. A lot of people wind up not especially politically inclined due to apathy or comfort or monetary pressure or a great deal of other factors so they wind up taking in very baseline understanding of politics influenced by the institutions and such around them-school history, political ads, and of course Parents. And how your parents feel will generally affect how you feel if only that you’re learning from them. Obviously many people wind up going against their parents on this too.
I’m in eu and we just had a really big election. The votes of young people were different from the older generations in my country. Very different. The environment party won by far in the age slot 18-30. In total, they are almost 10% behind the winner. The party who won the whole thing got 13% with those under 30.
Not once in my life have I voted for the same party my parents voted for just because it is what they did. They actually didn’t tell me what they will do with their cross unless I specifically asked. They always wanted me to be a responsible adult and to have my own, informed opinion.
This is sooo weird to imagine.
No weirder than Becky assuming that because Carla’s parents want Manley to win that she would automatically vote for Robin.
Especially since Robin was voting against Carla’s rights two weeks ago. I feel like that and the donations to her opponent may well be linked.
Yeah the whole 2 party system has really created a recursive and stupid political ecosystem here.
I mean, it is probably different when there is only two choices. Like, there isn’t much of a middle term. You either agree with your parents our you actively votes the exact opposite of what they want.
Becky isn’t going to get anyone to vote for Robin in that building: Joyce opposes her homophobia, Sal doesn’t care about politics, Dorothy is liberal, Sarah is too grumpy to care about dumb stuff, Amber is already busy dealing with her mental problems, everyone else is either an LGBT person (Mandy, Grace, Sierra, Ruth, Carla), or they just hate the politics of Robin (Roz). Even Mary has stated her disappointment at Robin. Maybe Becky can have luck either promoting a new independent/humanitarian fake image for Robin, or get the vote of neckbeards and other internet scumbags.
That’s gonna be a fun conversation, Becky telling Joyce to vote for Robin. Plus the ‘woot you’re not in church’ thing. Becky is totally running into Joyce on the way out, isn’t she.
Sal hates Robin’s politics too because Robin’s supported racist immigration policies.
I don’t think she actually cares, so long as she can claim she’s doing the job.
I mean, she specifically said she knows she’s going to suck, and just not throwing the job.
*Obligatory Carla is the best comment*
I know this isn’t the first time this has come up, but I love how supportive Carla’s parents are of her. They just sound awesome! :3
…Yes, and if she were cis, they’d just be normal great parents. It really bugs me that we live in a world where “doesn’t hate their trans kid” is enough to make parents awesome.
[soapbox]
Me: “A gay friend called me an ally today for expressing sympathy about the Pulse shooting. That shouldn’t be enough to make me an ally!”
My wife: “I think you’re an ally. You went to Frank and John’s wedding.”
Me: “Noooo! That is also too low a bar!”
[soapbox continues]
I read a story on Quora about a Black man who got run out of his community by a police officer with a gun – someone had called him in for breaking into his own car. And I realized – there are some communities where that shit happens, and some where it doesn’t happen. But where are the communities where the racists are actively forced to physically move out of the community? I’ve never heard of that happening even once ever anywhere. And it should!
[end soapbox, for now]
They hand made her a toy of her favourite tv show because it didn’t have merch. That’s pretty supportive, cis or trans.
But yes, it’s a depressingly low bar sometimes.
Yeah, how low the bar is is really depressing. And even more depressing when you realize how many parents of trans kids fail it.
[Response to soapbox:]
We will have achieved racial equality in the U.S. when a group of African-Americans can lynch a KKK member with absolutely no consequences.
(Not advocating for such a thing to happen. Just illustrating a point.)
Poorly.
We’ll know we have reached racial equality when someone transcribes a show that or book that’s about racism but uses stand ins for race, and it takes a history scholar to get that it was commenting on racism from the recent past and present of the time it was published.
If we’d achieved racial equality, there wouldn’t be any KKK members.
To be fair I get the impression that Carla’s parents were pretty awesome and that fact that they fully supported her being a girl and sisnn’t slack on being awesome in other ways because of that upgraded them to awesome.
After today, I suspect that Becky can tell Robin that her problem isn’t her platform as much as she is perceived to be an empty suit with a smile on top.
Yeah, it is also a bit of meta-commentary from Carla that Willis tends to write bad parents by default and has to consciously choose to write good parents.
Not sure why you think that.
Robin’s original platform was enough to turn off pretty much all of this floor (except Mary, who didn’t like her because she was an unmarried (and thus presumably lesbian) Catholic), but it was also enough to get her elected with plenty of rural support.
Now she’s reversed that and lost most of her original base, but that history means no one here is likely to trust her new platform.
Seems to be largely platform based to me.
I wonder if Becky will find anyone on this floor who actually likes Robin and would be willing to vote for her. I suspect not but who knows?
man, it’s probably rude to criticize the art but I…I really hate the thing Willis has started doing recently with Becky’s hair where he’ll draw her in profile from the right and her WHOLE face is covered with hair and drawn through it, like in panel 3 here. like, it legitimately creeps me out, I have no idea why? having an eye or part of her mouth showing is totally fine, but gradually her hair has fallen more and more in her face until the whole thing is covered like that and I find it SO uncomfortable to look at. it…actually kinda makes my skin crawl, lmao. is this some weird new phobia that my brain has invented? thanks brain, I hate it.
I don’t think criticism is rude, as long as it’s constructive – or at least, not “I don’t like this change for me immediately!”
That said, I get bothered whenever a character talks with their eyes closed. I know it’s a standard artistic convention and not Willis’ invention… but no one in real life closes their eyes in the middle of a conversation. It’s just not natural.
Hello, there. Let me introduce myself. I’m No One, apparently.
(Let’s see if the comment doesn’t disappear into the aether, this time.)
How and why do you do that? Do you not find it confusing to be unsure if you are even facing in the direction of the people you are morons walking to?
I think the eyes-closed-while-talking is more of a visual symbol of unconcern. Comics and other visual art use lot of those symbols that don’t actually appear in real life. For example, hardly anyone who is surprised actually has an exclamation point growing out of their head. And don’t get me started on the mess that would result from all those word balloons floating around.
Word balloons burst when they get high enough up and the words dissipate as they float down.
Extra-loud talking and shouting, and some sound effects, don’t always dissipate fully. The chunks injure people on the ground.
I mean, it might be. But it just draws me out of the moment – ‘this person isn’t even looking at the person they’re speaking to. What if a bird flies at them?’
It also depends on the style and comic format. I will have different standards for say, Garfield and Uncanny X-men. At a certain level of ongoing story and involved drama, cartoony conventions become less acceptable, in my opinion.
I think it goes further back than recently.
the first time I can remember it happening with the whole face was about two months ago, in this strip. before then it seems like there was always at least a BIT of nose or chin peeking out. i scrolled through several pages of the becky tag to check my memory but it’s entirely possible he’s done it earlier than that.
either way, it just weirds me right the hell out. idk.
that comment was supposed to include this link:
http://www.dumbingofage.com/2019/comic/book-9-comic/03-sometimes-the-sky-was-so-far-away/faketweetin/
must have messed up the html somewhere.
It reminds me of
“Don’t get it wet. And whatever you do, don’t feed it after midnight.”
Cool rebel Carla, you’re awesome. 🙂
Becky’s not trying hard enough to get votes for Robin, which might be her intention at this rate. :/
Liking and respecting your parents doesn’t mean you have to follow their political ideals exactly, Carla.
If you parents like and respect you, they should have no problem if you don’t.
Bear in mind, two weeks ago Robin was actively campaigning against LGBT rights. I’m guessing that has something to do with Carla’s parents spending thousands on her opponent.
This.
She’s aware. That’s why she comments about rebelling by actually liking her parents instead of reflexively doing the opposite.
But by commenting about her parents instead of her beliefs she can make it seem like she doesn’t care about politics and not get drawn into explaining why she’s personally against Robin. Because “too cool to care” and “not going to tell the fundie about being trans”.
All good points.
Although I’d personally arguing not caring about politics isn’t ‘cool’ and blindly following your parents political ideals (or appearing to) makes you a mindless sheep…
I like my parents even though they are more likely to benefit from supporting Robin as big company owners, they chose to back her opponent instead because they care more about me.
I refuse to consult google on general principles. I’m just going to assume that while she’s going through the motions, Becky is looking for a storge room that could hold a bed that was displaced by a giant dino-plushie.
Not googling, cos I did Ancient Greek at uni. See, it has its uses.
Needing to say you are the cool rebel out loud guarantees you are not. It’s like having to say you are king in Game of Thrones.
Ah, but Carla does not care.
4D chess!
I wouldn’t take that line too seriously, considering it was from Tywin Lannister – if he understood people half as well as he thought he did, he would be alive, his children wouldn’t be psychological wrecks and his legacy wouldn’t be crumbling.
Carla’s 4D chess is superior <3
When I started reading this comic, I didn’t like Carla very much. I thought she was mean. But dang she grew on me fast. One of my favourite characters nowdays.
Imagine being such a cool, rebel individualist that you choose to be a conformist in a society that consists of and values individualism. Wouldn’t that make one MORE unique?
I just thought: Might Roz be the tutor in canvassing skills that Becky never knew was available? It seems like the scion of a political family like she is might know the basics even if she has no interest in politics herself.
Not like Roz is going to teach Becky how to help Robin win.
I think it would be more accurate to say that this theory is that Roz decides to appoint herself Becky’s unpaid assistant so that Becky doesn’t lose.
Wouldn’t it be Carla’s parents who are the cool rebels by not sucking?
Nonshitty parents are definitely the minority in this comic.
Poor Becky, has no idea what she’s doing
I deeply admire her refusal to ever let that slow her down.
Au contraire, Alt-Text, I happen to already know what ‘storge’ means.
Well, sorta.
I recall storge being one of the Greek words for love, and was able from context to deduce it refers to familial love.
Correct; Greek has multiple words that are only partially-correctly translated ‘love’. For example, probably the most famous is ‘agapé’, which is semi-correctly translated ‘charity’ in most translations of the New Testament but is more accurately defined as positive, caring and even self-sacrificing behaviour motivated by an intellectual determination to do good towards someone.
I love Carla
on one side,
off with the rollers inside, already !
on the other,
…are those Air Gear ?
Does Carla have motorized roller sandals? Where is the propulsion system. Did she just invent some radical new micro-miniaturized technology just to power her skates???
I’d assume she’s just coasting while she checks her phone. Probably a little unrealistic on carpet, but not too strange.
You mean to tell me that the title isn’t a reference to Harry Potter and the Pillars of Storgé?