• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

AJD's comic notebook
7 7

1,132 posts in this topic

11 hours ago, AJD said:

The scratchy interior art is growing on me, even though the quality seems to vary from panel to panel. Look at this page for example. The face in the top right panel is quite nicely drawn and conveys suitable gravitas. The panel below looks like my dog drew it. Overall though, I'm kinda getting into it.
 

With early Fox Comics at least, that inconsistency was usually the difference between 'the artist had reference to swipe from here' and 'the artist did not have reference to swipe from here'.  2c

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Point Five said:

With early Fox Comics at least, that inconsistency was usually the difference between 'the artist had reference to swipe from here' and 'the artist did not have reference to swipe from here'.  2c

 

That's very plausible. It could certainly be the case here. I just spent 15 minutes looking for a 1940s or earlier drawing of an iguanodon that might have been the model for the cover. (And a lot more time reading articles about dinosaurs... ) I didn't find an exact match, but a few near misses (as below), and it seems likely that Reilly had looked up 'dinsoaur'. The 'hands' are a dead giveaway that this was the beast he was drawing.

Alice_Woodward_1896.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a Barks duck story to my 7-year-old for the first time last night. With today's entertainment that's available to kids I don't know that it rocked his world, but he definitely got some laughs out of it. Amazing how well they still hold up!   :cloud9:

 

 

Edited by Point Five
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, this arrived in my mailbox on Friday:

WF_archives_3.JPG.557085caa0d7188883736e7f6ac5d630.JPG

It contains, inter alia, a reprint of this issue:

WF_16_sm.thumb.jpg.4dcde10fe970d622e30b9267706e4714.jpg

In the cover story, a mining company is teleporting huge quantities of uranium ore from Venus (where it is hard to do anything because of the atmosphere) to Mars. The following explanation is given for the disaster shown on the cover.

WF_16_int1.thumb.jpg.17d4477dd8e1c65899429f0965dbca86.jpg

WF_16_int2.thumb.jpg.6675c4f4041aea7c00aa8be4e384e940.jpg

Mr Gaines, Mr Feldstein, we need to talk physics.

The explanation of the mass on the end of the string is OK. The tension in the string (T) will in fact be proportional to the mass of the object (m), and its orbital speed (v) will be related to the tension and the length of the string (r) so: T = m v2 / r where the rhs of the equation is the centripetal acceleration. Now let's do the physics for a body orbiting under gravity:

gravitational force = G m M /r2 = m v2 / r where G is the gravitational constant, M the mass of the central body (the sun) and r is the distance from the sun. Clearly m cancels out in this equation, giving G M = r v2 which is independent of the mass of the orbiting body. (In fact, that's Kepler's third law, relating the length of the year to the distance from the central body). In other words, moving stuff from Venus to Mars will do nothing to change the orbits. And that's pretty obvious when you look at the solar system - the big planets are on the outside!

Amazingly, there are no letters in following issues pointing this out. I now think it's my duty to build a time machine, go back to 1952 and pen a cranky letter to the EC crew. I've read enough EC sci-fi to know that nothing could possibly go wrong with my plan... see you later, maybe.

 

P.S. the calculation of the amount of U-235 retrieved from 350 billion tons of ore isn't too bad - the quoted figure of two million ounces is right if the extraction efficiency is ~10%, which could be right for the early 1950s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the gravitational stuff, which I have a basic understanding of, but not enough to read equations (are you a Physics prof, AJD?) What would concern me most is how the scientists didn't realize what was causing the mass change when apparently the 'atomic energy' stuff was being broadcast on the radio.

Do the aliens on the cover (fantastic, btw) actually make it into the story or are they just watchers in a watched land?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @Harry Lime :hi:

The aliens are just bystanders. The story cuts away at the end to an alien schoolteacher explaining that's why the solar system now has only six planets. (Pluto hadn't been shown the door back then.)

The thing that gets me about it is why have a laboured scientific "explanation" as a key part of the story - and get it completely wrong?

(And, yes, I was once and hope to be again a lecturer in physics.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, AJD said:

Hi @Harry Lime :hi:

The aliens are just bystanders. The story cuts away at the end to an alien schoolteacher explaining that's why the solar system now has only six planets. (Pluto hadn't been shown the door back then.)

The thing that gets me about it is why have a laboured scientific "explanation" as a key part of the story - and get it completely wrong?

(And, yes, I was once and hope to be again a lecturer in physics.)

The writers were probably not expecting physics experts to be reading their funny books and knowing just a little bit of physics (a dangerous thing) were hoping to dazzle the uneducated clods. At least their sums add up, yes I was sad enough to check how many ounces of uranium would be produced in a calendar year given their statistics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just added this Fawcett book to my war bonds cover collection. It's a bit of cheat since the war bonds ad isn't worked into the cover art, but it's pretty prominent, so near enough.

FunnyAnimals30.jpg.c5fca3ea401195ea86b4c7506bfa77a5.jpg

And there's an ad for paper drives on the first page - probably dooming some golden age comic books to oblivion! The luminaries of the Fawcett editorial advisory board are pretty cool too!

FunnyAnimals30_int.thumb.jpg.4e299d12454120821f798e08f7051739.jpg

I REALLY wish I could find a Funny Animals #6, which has a full on war bonds cover. But I've been looking for that book for five years now, without any luck. :sorry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AJD said:

Just added this Fawcett book to my war bonds cover collection. It's a bit of cheat since the war bonds ad isn't worked into the cover art, but it's pretty prominent, so near enough.

 

Seems to me there is more missing than just the war bonds ad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always feel a need to post this whenever you mention this book and your long quest for a copy (for reference purposes of course :D ) And as you and i have discussed before in numerous PM's, it is a toughie. Sold to me as a Crowley copy, but when i finally send it off for grading before years end CGC will have the 'final' say in the matter. 

Fawcetts Funny Animals #6.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2018 at 12:03 AM, sagii said:

Always feel a need to post this whenever you mention this book and your long quest for a copy (for reference purposes of course :D ) And as you and i have discussed before in numerous PM's, it is a toughie. Sold to me as a Crowley copy, but when i finally send it off for grading before years end CGC will have the 'final' say in the matter. 

 

For 'reference purposes' here's a beautiful copy of a book you can't find a beater copy of... :slapfight:

Can't say I blame you though - that is a really pretty book. If it ever needs a new home...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
7 7