0701: "Science Valentine"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

WhiskerTips
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:49 pm UTC

0701: "Science Valentine"

Postby WhiskerTips » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:05 am UTC

Image

title-text: You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.

This was a good one, I like getting into the valentine's spirit. But it was also very sad.

Herr Mors
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 1:52 am UTC

0701: "Science Valentine"

Postby Herr Mors » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:06 am UTC

Image
alt-text:You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.

I nearly bawwed


See: http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=56427

.cheeseofdoom.
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:09 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby .cheeseofdoom. » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:06 am UTC

Somewhat depressing, but a good comic nonetheless. Don't you just love science?

jebus0
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:53 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby jebus0 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:09 am UTC

Holy fuck that is so sad :(
to do all that and then realize its not there...

User avatar
SW15243
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:56 am UTC
Location: The Frozen White North
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby SW15243 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:10 am UTC

I thought the sciency approach had already failed us?

Good comic; well written, if a bit of a downer.
Last edited by SW15243 on Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:11 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

mmaluff
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 10:38 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby mmaluff » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:11 am UTC

This is a sad, sad comic :(.

JustMe
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:21 pm UTC
Location: Washington (the real one - not D.C)

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby JustMe » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:11 am UTC

I didn't get into the comic that much, but the alt text is a quote that should show up regularly in discussions of science and decision making.

It won't, but it should!
I have traveled from 1963 to be a member of the unofficial board Council of Elders. Phear M3

User avatar
VectorZero
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:22 am UTC
Location: Kensington

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby VectorZero » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:12 am UTC

Awwww. Yay for scientific rigour?

Of course there could be a methodological flaw ... Needs peer review. Or alternatively "We regret to inform you we are unable to publish your findings as the results are not sufficiently generalisable."
Last edited by VectorZero on Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:14 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Van wrote:Fireballs don't lie.

User avatar
torontoraptor
Posts: 442
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:58 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby torontoraptor » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:12 am UTC

Saw where it was going rather fast, but oh man, that was good. I guess he proved this wrong eh?


Edit: Goddammit ninjaed.
Promicin wrote:Now if I can just grab on with my tongue-like foot... wait. I am not a mussel.

pseudoidiot wrote:
You, sir, name? wrote:fucking owls is enjoyable.
Someone should sig this

User avatar
Omegaton
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 6:23 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Omegaton » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:13 am UTC

Maybe it'll get rejected in peer review based on poor methodology. I question whether there may be biases.

This is comic is so good.

EDIT: Damn, ninja'd!

User avatar
xodyac
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:06 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby xodyac » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:13 am UTC

This is kind of a get-out-of-my-head-Randall moment; I've been thinking about my single-ness all Valentine's week and have been trying to come up with a scientific approach to analyzing whether being single is worth it or not. I'm a sad murloc right now.

calico
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:09 am UTC
Location: The Lappy
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby calico » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:14 am UTC

I like the discontinuities in the panel 1 graph. Oh feelings... so mathematically untidy.
Last edited by calico on Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:16 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Oh no, I've said too much; I haven't said enough

Kaijyuu
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:58 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Kaijyuu » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:15 am UTC

Then he finds a small error early in his study that skewed all the results in the wrong direction.


Oops.
The cake is a lie, but truth is in Pi.

User avatar
scikidus
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:34 pm UTC
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby scikidus » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:15 am UTC

I'd personally like to know what algorithm he used to quantify happiness.
Happy hollandaise!

"The universe is a figment of its own imagination" -Douglas Adams

calico
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:09 am UTC
Location: The Lappy
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby calico » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:18 am UTC

Kaijyuu wrote:Then he finds a small error early in his study that skewed all the results in the wrong direction.

Oops.

Yeah, that should be fun to explain.
Oh no, I've said too much; I haven't said enough

davidhbrown
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:42 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby davidhbrown » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:19 am UTC

Same character from 698?

dator sojat
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:21 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby dator sojat » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:23 am UTC

I was playing "She Blinded Me With Science" by Thomas Dolby as I read this, which I thought was kind of funny.

JamesGecko
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:23 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby JamesGecko » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:25 am UTC

Sounds like he graphed the decline of the infatuation stage of the relationship. Which isn't a terribly healthy stage to be in for extended periods of time, from what my married friends tell me.

User avatar
meat.paste
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:08 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby meat.paste » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:29 am UTC

Science. It works, bitches!

I liked this comic.
Huh? What?

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Brace » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:32 am UTC

Analysis begs the question by assuming the etiology of happiness has something to do with the girlfriend. Or maybe I read it wrong.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
Omegaton
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 6:23 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Omegaton » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:38 am UTC

Kilroy(ZTC) wrote:Analysis begs the question by assuming the etiology of happiness has something to do with the girlfriend. Or maybe I read it wrong.

Ah, you mean like so: http://xkcd.com/552/

User avatar
cephalopod9
Posts: 1997
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 7:23 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby cephalopod9 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:39 am UTC

I believe he's failed to properly investigate confounding variables:
Image
Image

OrangeAipom
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:19 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby OrangeAipom » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:41 am UTC

davidhbrown wrote:Same character from 698?

They're both Randall, of course.

I dislike that Dating - Engaged is less than Engaged. This bothers me, but I don't know if it should as I haven't been engaged before.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4785
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:43 am UTC

Kilroy(ZTC) wrote:Analysis begs the question by assuming the etiology of happiness has something to do with the girlfriend. Or maybe I read it wrong.

That was part of his hypothesis, which he found increasingly more difficult to defend. He hypothesized that she had made him happier; but looking at the data, he found he hadn't really become happier in any kind of trend since meeting her, which leaves no correlation to support his hypothesis that she makes him happy.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
XbHW_TestEngr
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Kirkland, WA
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby XbHW_TestEngr » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:49 am UTC

As someone with 20 years of marriage experience
( *10 years, then she died +
*10 years, then she filed for divorce )

I appreciate and approve of this comic.
... and there will be cake.

I have traveled from 1960 to be a member of the unofficial Council of Elders. Phear M3

benbald72 wrote:I feel connected to the author and therefore appreciate the comic, regardless of whether or not I understand the joke ....

dragoneye1589
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:08 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby dragoneye1589 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:50 am UTC

I had a good laugh at this because I had a statistics midterm today and one of the questions was on sample correlation coefficients.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5547
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:57 am UTC

I missed my opportunity to use this. Heh.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

SvenV
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:56 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby SvenV » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:58 am UTC

You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.

Quick, someone tell the CRU!

:wink:

User avatar
aurumelectrum13
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:11 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby aurumelectrum13 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:59 am UTC

My SO just recently decided that I wasn't particularly significant, but damn, this comic is sad.

kozzoz
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:10 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby kozzoz » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:29 am UTC

I would heartily agree with the comic, but as in most forms of statistics, this doesn't show the full picture...

- were there independent variables early in the relationship that boosted happiness (ie, was he high on ecstasy for three years straight)?
- were there independent variables late in the relationship that degraded happiness (ie, terribly disappointed that raptors haven't become a core component of the political system?)
- are there dependent short-term variables that degraded happiness (ie planning for a wedding; goddammit that's the thing that came closest to splitting me and my now-wife up)?

- is it the representation of emotion in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnsSUqgkDwU from 0:00 to 0:34?

User avatar
chridd
Has a vermicelli title
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:07 am UTC
Location: ...Earth, I guess?
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby chridd » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:31 am UTC


That was math, not science... perhaps it can be graphed, just not solved in terms of known functions.

EDIT: Or maybe those were calculated during the part of the graph where ♡ was undefined (thus making the whole equation undefined).
~ chri d. d. /tʃɹɪ.di.di/ (Phonotactics, schmphonotactics) · she(?)(?(?)(?))(?(?(?))(?))(?) · Forum game scores
I'm cool, just look at my sunglasses. 8-)
mittfh wrote:I wish this post was very quotable...
flicky1991 wrote:In both cases the quote is "I'm being quoted too much!"

Troger64
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:54 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Troger64 » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:37 am UTC

loving the r values

stats FTW
although, i think a star just winked out of existence as i typed that

dabigkid
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 3:09 am UTC
Location: NJ
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby dabigkid » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:45 am UTC

That was really depressing.

Also, the alt text is amazing. Probably the best quote I've heard so far this year... nay, it's the best quote I've heard this entire decade!
wut

Larphenflorp
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:34 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Larphenflorp » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:48 am UTC

Am I the only one who thinks there should be a semicolon, rather than a comma, in the alt text?

dabigkid
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 3:09 am UTC
Location: NJ
Contact:

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby dabigkid » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:49 am UTC

Larphenflorp wrote:Am I the only one who thinks there should be a semicolon, rather than a comma, in the alt text?

technically yes, but who cares?
wut

User avatar
glasnt
Posts: 539
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:18 am UTC
Location: SQUEE!

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby glasnt » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:52 am UTC

Hypothetically, that graph could be the penis ejaculating over time...

User avatar
ysth
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:21 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby ysth » Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:54 am UTC

dabigkid wrote:Also, the alt text is amazing. Probably the best quote I've heard so far this year... nay, it's the best quote I've heard this entire decade!
Larphenflorp wrote:Am I the only one who thinks there should be a semicolon, rather than a comma, in the alt text?

Nice sequence.

WhiskerTips wrote:[img.../img]

title-text: You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.

This was a good one, I like getting into the valentine's spirit. But it was also very sad.

Comic link? (See the rules.)
A math joke: r = | |csc(θ)|+|sec(θ)| |-| |csc(θ)|-|sec(θ)| |

pathumx
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:11 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby pathumx » Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:05 am UTC

is it just me, or has randall been anti relationship lately?

mania
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 9:44 am UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby mania » Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:09 am UTC

I cannot understand how so many xkcders confuse title text and alt text. :?

Larphenflorp
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:34 pm UTC

Re: "Science Valentine" Discussion

Postby Larphenflorp » Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:30 am UTC

I cannot understand how so many xkcders confuse title text and alt text. :?


I'm sorry, I didn't mean to; I just don't know the difference. Please enlighten me.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: moody7277, wumpus and 39 guests