What If? 2: Additional Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions

“Disclaimer. Do not try any of this at home. The author of this book is an internet cartoonist, not a health or safety expert. He likes it when things catch fire or explode, which means he does not have your best interests in mind. The publisher and author disclaim responsibility for any adverse effects resulting, directly or indirectly, from information contained in this book.”

The book opens with a humorous warning which parodies the typical “do not try this at home” disclaimer. While still advising caution in its readership and providing a layer of legal protection to the publishing company, this quote establishes the book’s throughline tone of humor as well as the author’s mischievous and relatable persona.

“I like ridiculous questions because nobody is expected to know the answer, which means it’s okay to be confused.

I studied physics in college, so there’s a lot of stuff I feel like I should know—like the mass of an electron or why your hair sticks up when you rub a balloon against it. If you ask me how much an electron weighs, I feel a little rush of anxiety, like it’s a pop quiz and I’m going to be in trouble if I don’t know the answer without looking it up.”

In the book’s introduction, Munroe discusses his own experience in higher education, thereby establishing his position as a scientific authority while also contrasting the pressure of scientific study with the relief of dabbling in the “ridiculous.” He discusses his reasons for writing in the popular science genre, as well as his motivations for producing this book in particular, presenting himself as a sympathetic and relatable figure.

“The same kind of science is used to answer serious questions and silly ones. […] Trying to answer silly questions can take you through some serious science.”

This quote provides a concise summary of the book’s content and the theme of Absurdity In Imaginary Situations and Real-World Phenomena by introducing Munroe’s approach of using absurd questions as a springboard to explain real scientific principles and theories entertainingly. He uses chiasmus, a literary technique and type of parallelism where two juxtaposed phrases—here the antonyms “serious” and “silly”—create a sense of linguistic balance.