Dudley's dungeon
Friday, 19 October, 2007 |
by Tontan the Tartarian |
---------
|......±|
|.......|
######-@......|
|.......|
|.......|
----+----
#
#
@ "Mmm, I didn't know there trees in the Dungeons of Doom."
|
---------
|......±|
|..@....|
######+.......|
|.......|
|.......|
----+----
#
#
@ "Doors locked, no traps, no newts... Phew, at last I can take a nap."
|
---------
|.....@±|
|.......|
######+.......|
|.......|
|.......|
----+----
#
#
@ "Zzzzzz..."
|
------------
/ REST IN \
/ PEACE \
/ \
| Dudley was |
| killed by |
| -onian |
| physics |
/\\_/(\/(/\)\//\/|
@ "Aaargh!!!"
|
http://dudley.nicolaas.net
|
|
http://dudley.nicolaas.net
Want to contribute? Write an email to dudley@nicolaas.net!
Powered by Nics
Rating
Average rating: Good Number of ratings: 29
Comments
Skyrock |
October 19, 2007 00:04
|
First comment: 26 July, 2007 |
41 comments written |
I don't like the pun, but it's F because no one has yet thought of working with trees. |
Grognor |
October 19, 2007 01:04
|
First comment: 4 April, 2007 |
1161 comments written |
I liked the pun but I detected 203894719014 inaccuracies in this comic and I will now list a few to prove a point.
Newton was a so he clearly should have been represented by a Q, and as everybody knows, he is the only person allowed to sleep under trees.
The script didn't show Dudley closing the , and I find this so exceedingly distracting that I cannot rate this comic excellent. |
Schlitz |
October 19, 2007 01:56
|
First comment: 19 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
Cute.
"Newton was a "? Are you high? |
Grognor |
October 19, 2007 02:54
|
First comment: 4 April, 2007 |
1161 comments written |
Son of a--
I knew this would happen.
Somebody finally copied my name.
You, impostor, are an egregious popinjay. A pecksniffian charlatan, an obstreperous caitiff. Reveal yourself and flame with honor, or do not apply your ridiculous inaccuracies at all.
I rated this excellent comic excellent because it was.
Jerk. |
Glowaczynski |
October 19, 2007 06:02
|
First comment: 19 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
After spendig some time on this one, I got it.
-> body attracion -> -onian physics.
Sure, there is only person with head strong enough to sleep under trees :) |
L |
October 19, 2007 06:53
|
First comment: 10 February, 2005 |
285 comments written |
Ecch! Trees are #, you nidderling!
(Wow, insulting people on the Internet is more fun than I thought.) |
Rapigel |
October 19, 2007 06:54
|
First comment: 19 October, 2007 |
4 comments written |
Impostor Grognor's comment rated excellent for its fine parody |
Xilinx |
October 19, 2007 08:42
|
First comment: 19 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
Body attraction???
An with the size of Texas, I'd say... |
Dominic |
October 19, 2007 08:44
|
First comment: 19 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
Grognor, Newton does not appear in the comic, only a . |
Grognor |
October 19, 2007 09:01
|
First comment: 4 April, 2007 |
1161 comments written |
You're both impostors! I'm the real Grognor! |
Nameless |
October 19, 2007 09:04
|
First comment: 29 December, 2004 |
281 comments written |
G for the pun and E for 'Grognor's first post. |
jukka |
October 19, 2007 10:01
|
First comment: 22 November, 2006 |
57 comments written |
I wouldn't call Newton a , because he lived long before quantum physic was invented.
Actually, I didn't get the punchline before reading the comments and remembering the story of the falling to Newton's head. First I thought about Rip van Winkle.. |
Dol |
October 19, 2007 11:53
|
First comment: 27 March, 2007 |
24 comments written |
No, I'm the real Grognor...no, wait...
You should be wearing a hard helmet near falling traps. |
Skyrock |
October 19, 2007 15:16
|
First comment: 26 July, 2007 |
41 comments written |
Am I a bad person if I still have a hard time to recognize the first Grognor post as an impersonation? It reads so... authentic. |
zem |
October 19, 2007 17:56
|
First comment: 5 December, 2005 |
64 comments written |
just for the record, newton never solved the -body problem :) |
Dextery |
October 19, 2007 19:16
|
First comment: 4 October, 2007 |
6 comments written |
G for the comic (newts and physics are a good combination), E++ for zem's comment! |
Grognor |
October 19, 2007 20:43
|
First comment: 4 April, 2007 |
1161 comments written |
I hate you. I hope your complete arrogance leads to your inevitable downfall sooner than before, you gangraping assholes! |
Spartacus |
October 19, 2007 23:08
|
First comment: 19 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
No, I'm Grognor! |
Zienth |
October 19, 2007 23:24
|
First comment: 8 May, 2007 |
9 comments written |
I'm Grognor! |
Trogdor |
October 20, 2007 03:51
|
First comment: 20 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
Actually, I'm Grognor. |
Callie |
October 20, 2007 06:46
|
First comment: 16 July, 2007 |
31 comments written |
What if the first one was real and the SECOND one was an impostor?
The world will never know! |
Mikoangelo |
October 20, 2007 09:31
|
First comment: 19 October, 2005 |
82 comments written |
So Grognor is a -man? |
Grognor |
October 20, 2007 10:09
|
First comment: 4 April, 2007 |
1161 comments written |
Oh, whatever. In a month none of you will even remember this happened. |
Rodan |
October 20, 2007 14:30
|
First comment: 28 March, 2007 |
15 comments written |
Sounds like a challenge to me. |
Grognor and Mrs. Grognor |
October 20, 2007 14:33
|
First comment: 20 October, 2007 |
1 comments written |
I'm Grognor and so is my wife! |
T.K. |
October 20, 2007 18:27
|
First comment: 14 October, 2007 |
13 comments written |
Cue rimshot!
And Jukka is right; Sir Isaac Newton didn't work with quantum mechanics at all; his discoveries pertained to larger bodies.
And I don't believe there ever was a Grognor. |
Toby Bartels |
October 21, 2007 01:47
|
First comment: 11 August, 2007 |
83 comments written |
Newton didn't know quantum mechanics as we know it today, but he did know something quantum.
Newton postulated that was composed of fast-moving particles (quanta), but Huygens's wave theory quickly became the favourite, on the grounds that only it could explain diffraction. But in 1905, Einstein used a particle theory to explain the photo-electric effect (it was for this that he won a Nobel prize, by the way), showing that Newton was right about all along (10 years before he showed that Newton was wrong about gravity, the subject of this cartoon).
And how can diffraction be explained in Newton's particle theory? Because all particles show a wave-like uncertainty --thanks to quantum mechanics.
|
Fathead |
October 22, 2007 18:01
|
First comment: 1 April, 2006 |
1136 comments written |
They are ± if you use the "extended" set! |
Kerta |
December 16, 2007 05:35
|
First comment: 12 December, 2007 |
72 comments written |
Some of you guys are overly harsh. |
Quint Sakugarne |
January 4, 2008 05:29
|
First comment: 1 January, 2008 |
233 comments written |
I was expecting "-onion physics", and your name sounds too much like Tornado Tonion anyway.
But great concept. |
http://dudley.nicolaas.net
Want to contribute? Write an email to dudley@nicolaas.net!
Powered by Nics
|
|