This is topic XKCD in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=053038

Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
 
I've been in a bummed out mood all night, but then I remembered that XKCD puts out a new comic on late Thursday nights. I read it. I like this one a lot.

If any of you don't know what I'm talking about- here it is. XKCD
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
XKCD puts out a new comic more frequently than that, you realize.
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
the one from the other day was one of my favorites in the last few months I think.

http://xkcd.com/435/
 
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
 
I love xkcd.

There are at least a half-dozen threads here on the strip, however.

/spoilsport
 
Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
 
Yeah, they put one out every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. It's just that none of those days are this day unfortunately, except for Friday.
 
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
 
Strider- I so need to print that out for my husband.
 
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Strider:
the one from the other day was one of my favorites in the last few months I think.

http://xkcd.com/435/

I e-mailed that to my brother, the actuary.
 
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
 
xkcd: for all your nerd humor needs*

*allergy warning: author occasionally gets creepy weird over women
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by EmpSquared:
quote:
Originally posted by Strider:
the one from the other day was one of my favorites in the last few months I think.

http://xkcd.com/435/

I e-mailed that to my brother, the actuary.
Ah, but actuaries use applied math. My dad is a theoretical mathematician. I bet he'd love that one. [Wink]
 
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
 
My bro still focused mainly on pure math. Crazy genius.
 
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
 
I liked that one as long at the mouse over is included. Make it that much better [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
 
The joke actually works if you think of "purity" as in "purity test", too.
 
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by El JT de Spang:
I love xkcd.

There are at least a half-dozen threads here on the strip, however.

/spoilsport

Indeed.

Many of them with the same title.
 
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:


*allergy warning: author occasionally gets creepy weird over women

Occasionally? [Wink]

Yeah, the strips that give off an "airing dirty laundry" vibe tend to make me highly uncomfortable.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rivka:
My dad is a theoretical mathematician. I bet he'd love that one.

My dad loved it so much he printed it out and put it on his office door.

Two days ago, when someone else (a good friend of mine, as it happens) sent my mom the link . . .
 
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
 
I don't get today's comic. At all.
 
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
 
Are you familiar with the joke where a double entendre is created after the fact by saying "that's what she said!"

A bad example: Regarding some homework, one friend says to the other, "I can't believe how hard it is." Response: "That's what she said!" ("shooter" hands optional)

The strip is about the misapplication of this joke. It's about people who try to use jokes they don't understand.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
I got that.

I just thought it was really dumb.
 
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
 
Aha. Thanks. I get it now.

I liked the previous one much better, though. That was hilarious! I think I need to forward it to my physics professor.
 
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
 
quote:
That was hilarious! I think I need to forward it to my physics professor.
That's what she said......

(Come on, someone had to say it.)
 
Posted by sylvrdragon (Member # 3332) on :
 
The joke has a small bit of backstory. It makes a little more sense if you read these:

http://www.xkcd.com/174/

http://www.xkcd.com/366/
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Except I thought those were dumb too.
 
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
 
No, I think the useful bit of information that I needed was the use of "that's what she said." I didn't get those comics either, back when they were new.
 
Posted by Starsnuffer (Member # 8116) on :
 
Yeah, today's(friday's) I think is undoubtedly the worst strip of XKCD in history... Some of the red spider ones are pretty bad... but yeah.
 
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
 
I liked it...
 
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
 
Rivka, bluntly, why do you think it's dumb? Seems to me it's a fairly humorous examination of something that's dumb, as opposed to a dumb comic in and of itself.
 
Posted by Jhai (Member # 5633) on :
 
I like the "that's what she said" comics. I think you have to be in a certain demographic, though - you've got to have friends who say the phrase, either ironically or straight.
 
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
 
quote:
I got that.

I just thought it was really dumb.

I agree with Jhai. It's a 'cultural' thing.
 
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jhai:
I like the "that's what she said" comics. I think you have to be in a certain demographic, though - you've got to have friends who say the phrase, either ironically or straight.

Agreed.

My friends and I will say that and "your mom" occasionally. Though, for us, the goal is for it to make as little sense as possible in a sexual context. In fact, what made the second one silverdragon linked so funny for me is the fact that we've had that nearly exact same interaction take place at least a couple of times. It can be a great way to break the tension in a particularly heated discussion. Sometimes.

"So's your face" can be fun, too.
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
quote:
Except I thought those were dumb too.
I'm with rollainm and Jhai. I particularly liked the second one sylvrdragon linked because of the incorporation of "your mom" jokes, which my friends and I use relatively regularly. Or at least used to.

That's what she said has become much more popular in our conversation since The Office came around. And so far hasn't gotten old at all.
 
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
At least to you.....


Some of us were using it before the Office was even a show.

In either country....


[Wink]
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
well aren't you special. [Razz]
 
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
 
That's what she said.

[Smile]
 
Posted by Starsnuffer (Member # 8116) on :
 
My friends and I say it also, but... It just doesn't even strike me as humorous this time. The first one or two times he did it i might have cracked a smile... but this time I was just confused and thought it was "dumb," in rivka's words.
 
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
 
I don't ever think any given XKCD strip is dumb. It's either funny or terrifying.

that kid is so weird
 
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
I have seen some dumb ones.....but usually I find them pretty cool, and sometimes completely hilarious.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by EmpSquared:
Seems to me it's a fairly humorous examination of something that's dumb, as opposed to a dumb comic in and of itself.

You are entitled to your opinion. [Wink]
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
Huh?

I checked Erdos out on Wikipedia, but I still don't get it.
 
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
 
This explains it a bit.

Usually when I don't get an XKCD I go to the thread discussion in the official forum, where someone will have posted a link to something relevant. (I didn't get todays until I
 
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lisa:
Huh?

I checked Erdos out on Wikipedia, but I still don't get it.

You want this Wikipedia page.
 
Posted by ambyr (Member # 7616) on :
 
Or, you know, what he said.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
I have an Erdos number of 7 (confirmed). It might be as low as 4 but I have to check that by hand.
 
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
 
I love how Wikipedia already has the XKCD comic included.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
Now confirmed Erdos number of 5.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
That's pretty cool, Rabbit.
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
I have a Kevin Bacon number of 3.
 
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
Really? What were you in?
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by FlyingCow:
Really? What were you in?

I supose it really isn't that curious that you are more interested in Pixiest's filmography than my scientific publications.
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
FlyingCow: I was in a coupla amateur productions with a guy who had a single line in Pass The Ammo with Bill Paxton who was in Apollo 13 with Kevin Bacon.

I'm no one famous.

Rabbit: People can wrap their heads around stage and theatre better than they can around math. It's more accessible. Plus people know who Bill Paxton is and they probably don't know any of your associated mathematicians.
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
I'm stunned. I shouldn't be stunned by the things mathematicians will do, having roomed with a scary mathematician for three years in college, but I am.
 
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
You're stunned that mathematicians will do something many more people do with Kevin Bacon numbers?
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
Seriously, fugu. There are people who do statistical analyses on Bacon numbers? Who propose rational Bacon numbers?

I'm not criticizing; I think it's wonderful. But reading that Wikipedia article also made me feel like I'd been hit in the head with a blunt instrument.
 
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Yeah, people do those sorts of analyses with Kevin Bacon numbers. They even create entire websites dedicated to various aspects of Kevin Bacon numbers.

The only thing I don't see evidence of is rational Bacon numbers, but there's less pressure for that, since Bacon is alive, while Erdos is dead (and people need new ways to improve their score). Not to mention that these are mathematicians, and applying standard normalization methods to the data available isn't more than a few minutes work.
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
BTW, is this not similar to being "real" in a hatrack sense?

(I'm half real.)
 
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
 
Huh?
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Rabbit: People can wrap their heads around stage and theatre better than they can around math. It's more accessible. Plus people know who Bill Paxton is and they probably don't know any of your associated mathematicians.
Which is why I said it really isn't that curious that Flying Cow (or anyone other than a real math geek) would find your filmography more interesting.
 
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
 
I think we need a Hatrack #.

To get your Hatrack Number under infinity you have to have....met and had a meal with OSC, or someone who has a finite Hatrack Number. (We could make it Papa, but he has a Number of 1 on this list, so its not much of a difference).

Hence I think my number is 3 since I've ate with Dana and Bob and a number of others at a certain Weird Al show, and they have met and dined with PapaJ. I may be wrong though.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
To get your Hatrack Number under infinity you have to have....met and had a meal with OSC, or someone who has a finite Hatrack Number. (We could make it Papa, but he has a Number of 1 on this list, so its not much of a difference).
I think that should be called something other than a hatrack number since it doesn't relate directly to the forum. I think that to have a hatrack number of one, OSC must have responded directly to one of your posts (either on the forum, in e-mail or in person). To have a hatrack number of two, you must have had someone with a hatrack number of one respond directly to one of your posts.
 
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
 
In case anyone doesn't know who Bill Paxton is.
 
Posted by Xann. (Member # 11482) on :
 
Hey Rabbit, how do you have an edros nuber of 5? I for one am intrested.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
I co-authored a paper in Analytical Chemistry with Willse, who co-authored papers with Marty Hamilton, who co_authored papers with Halbeisen, who co-authored with Shelah who was a co-author of Erdos.
 
Posted by Xann. (Member # 11482) on :
 
SCORE! I totally just upped my hatrack number!!!


Joking, I was actually wondering kind of science or math you do. I never really liked chemistry, I spent the entire year of chemistry class making soap and looking up the periodic table on my calculator. Although I think a non-high school chemistry class might be cool.
 
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
quote:
I think that should be called something other than a hatrack number since it doesn't relate directly to the forum. I think that to have a hatrack number of one, OSC must have responded directly to one of your posts (either on the forum, in e-mail or in person). To have a hatrack number of two, you must have had someone with a hatrack number of one respond directly to one of your posts.
I've had OSC respond directly in his books to some of my posts here.
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Darth_Mauve:
To get your Hatrack Number under infinity you have to have....met and had a meal with OSC, or someone who has a finite Hatrack Number. (We could make it Papa, but he has a Number of 1 on this list, so its not much of a difference).

Hmm... he posted an article of mine on Ornery, he stood up and shook my hand at a book signing when I told him who I was. Hatrack number of 1?
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
OSC has responded directly to one of my posts. So I've got an OSC number of 1.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
He sent me an e-mail regarding one of my first posts back in the BML days. Hatrack #1. I think we almost certainly have enough #1s on the site that anyone who isn't at least a #2 would be pretty rare.
 
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
I'm a #1 - I had dinner with OSC and some other Hatrackers in 1999.
 
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
 
Ooo...and Pix has responded directly to at least one of my posts, so I have a 2.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by katharina:
I'm a #1 - I had dinner with OSC and some other Hatrackers in 1999.

Yes, but at that dinner did he respond to something you had posted at hatrack. If he didn't, you have a Card number of 1, but only a hatrack number of 2.
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Ooo...and Pix has responded directly to at least one of my posts, so I have a 2.

No I haven't!
 
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
I may note that part of the challenge of these numbers is normally that the number of people with low ranks is small. If in fact it is the case that the Hatrack community is dominated by low ranks, it may actually be more interesting to work out the poster with the *highest but finite* Hatrack or OSC #.

For the record, it appears that the largest finite Bacon number is 8 and the largest finite Erdos number is 13. (in both cases, so far)
http://www4.oakland.edu/enp/trivia/
 
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
 
[Frown]

Won't you, please?
 
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
I have definitely had OSC respond to me on Hatrack. However, that so much less of a big deal after having dinner with him that I have forgotten the details.
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
[Frown]

Won't you, please?

Oh... alright...

[Wave]
 
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Mucus: I'm pretty sure you mean "finite" [Wink]
 
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
Yeah. Got it right the first time, wrong the second and third.
 
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
 
[Big Grin]
 
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
Rabbit... it's not that I'm not interested in your publications, but that I know that I would in no way have ever heard of them. I didn't even know who Edros was before today, to be quite honest.

It is well known to me that you are a published scientist. Hearing that you had a published paper would be like hearing that Dagonee had a published legal brief to me. While it is impressive, it is not unexpected due to the nature of your chosen profession. In fact, due to your contributions to hatrack over the years, I'd be more surprised if you *did not* have an Edros number.

As to The Pixiest, I had no idea about any sort of connection to film - hence, the inquiry.

I know you've been shot at plenty on this site, especially in the global warming threads, but please do not take any dismissiveness from my inquiry. I have nothing but respect for you as a scientist, and have tried to be as respectful as possible when asking questions in threads in which you participate.

My inquiry to Pix was not meant to offend, nor do I think it was for the reasons you assumed.

(As an aside, I was a math teacher for 4 years, and now more of a math hobbyist - though not yet graduated to full math geekdom. So it is also not because I find acting more interesting/comprehensible than mathematics.)
 
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
 
He responded to my post/question about band practice logs. Even though he despises my system, does that mean I have a Hatrack number of 1?

[Smile]
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
Flying Cow, Not to worry. I was in no way offended. Like I said, I don't find it at all curious that you were more interested in asking about Pixiest's Bacon number than my scientific publications. And that isn't because I think you find films more interesting than Math or me more interesting than Pixiest. I too was curious to hear about Pix's low Bacon number.

I think it says something about how our culture views different kinds of achievements. An extremely famous mathematician will never have the same sort of name recognition as even a modestly successful film star. That isn't a complaint, its an observation. A film stars fame comes from doing something that they want people to watch. You can't be considered even modestly successful as a film star unless millions of people have seen you on the wide screen. Math isn't a performance and a mathematicians achievements will never be judged based on how many people know his/her name.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by BandoCommando:
He responded to my post/question about band practice logs. Even though he despises my system, does that mean I have a Hatrack number of 1?

[Smile]

Yes
 
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
So, would there be a Hatrack number, and a "real hatracker" number?

Since you have to be met in person by other "real" hatrackers to be considered "real"... would a "real" number of 1 be people who have met OSC personally? With a number of 2 being those hatrackers that met such a person at a some hatrack-con or another?
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by FlyingCow:
So, would there be a Hatrack number, and a "real hatracker" number?

Since you have to be met in person by other "real" hatrackers to be considered "real"... would a "real" number of 1 be people who have met OSC personally? With a number of 2 being those hatrackers that met such a person at a some hatrack-con or another?

I would call that a Card number not a real hatrack number.
 
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
I don't think that definition of a hatrack number makes sense. Card posts so infrequently that it seems to measure chance more than anything else.
 
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
quote:
Math isn't a performance and a mathematicians achievements will never be judged based on how many people know his/her name.
True. I think a film star's performance is, to a certain extent, judged on how many people know his/her name. In fact, if someone is the greatest actor on the planet, but no one watches their films... can they really be considered a success?

Whereas the mathematicians that got the Apollo 13 back home, or those that figured out all the trajectories on the LCROSS mission... they have achieved (will have achieved) far more significant success, even if their names are not widely known.

I will, of course, be scanning scientific publications for articles signed by "The Rabbit" in the future. [Evil]
 
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by katharina:
I don't think that definition of a hatrack number makes sense. Card posts so infrequently that it seems to measure chance more than anything else.

Well that, and what time periods you were active in. I registered about halfway through his last really active period, so it wasn't that hard for me to get a response (though digging it up might be a bit of a slog).
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by katharina:
I'm a #1 - I had dinner with OSC and some other Hatrackers in 1999.

I think you get a 1 for that, because it was in person. The forum itself should count as an intermediary, as should e-mail. So if you've only corresponded with him, you'd be a 2. But you had dinner with him in person, so you're a 1.
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
If I AM OSC does that make me a 0?
 
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
Rabbit: if it matters, I too am appalled that charisma counts so much more in life than intelligence. But it's the world we live in and we deal with the consequences every day. All the way down to pretty or social people making more money for the same work than reclusive ugmos like me.
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Strider:
If I AM OSC does that make me a 0?

Well, the Wikipedia article said that Erdos is the only one with an Erdos number of 0, so I guess so.
 
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
Huh. Groovy.

I just checked and it seems that with an amazing one co-authored paper to my name I have an Erdos number of 6.

After the publication of a second co-authored paper accepted but not yet published, I'll be down to 4.
 
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Met OSC, shook his hand, had a nice talk with his wife in Boston. And he replied to some of my posts.

Usually to tell me I was wrong. [Wink]
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Either method suggested gives me a Hatrack number of 1.

My dad has an Edros number of 2. Too bad I will never co-write a paper with him (I don't have nearly the necessary background!)
 
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Have him help you compose a post here -- that counts as publishing, right?
 
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
 
Erdos-Bacon number
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:
Met OSC, shook his hand, had a nice talk with his wife in Boston. And he replied to some of my posts.

Usually to tell me I was wrong. [Wink]

We argued about economics via e-mail. I think this was in my pre-Hatrack days, though.

The first time I wrote him was when Children of the Mind was posted on AOL. I stayed up all night reading it, and then wrote to him to point out a historical error. He acknowledged the error, but said he was going to keep it in anyway, for the sake of the story. 'Twas very cool.
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
interesting Plaid, didn't the girl who played Winnie in The Wonder Years become a mathematician?
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
these are great:

quote:
The only ways a lower number could be achieved would be:

* for an individual who had co-authored an academic paper with Paul Erdős to appear in a movie with Kevin Bacon;
* for Bacon to co-author an academic paper with someone with an Erdős number of 1, which would give Bacon an Erdős–Bacon number of 2;
* for anyone who appeared in the documentary N is a Number along with Erdős to appear in a film with Bacon, which would posthumously give Erdős an Erdős–Bacon number of 2;
* for Kevin Bacon to appear in a film that also uses stock footage of Erdős, giving Erdős an Erdős–Bacon number of 1;
* for a heretofore unknown joint academic paper by Bacon and Erdős to be published, giving Bacon an Erdős–Bacon number of 1.
* for Kevin Bacon to be revealed as Paul Erdős in disguise, giving Erdős-Bacon an Erdős-Bacon number of 0.

emphasis mine.
 
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
 
Bacon number 2 (played frisbee with Ethan Hawke).

If one were omniscient, I think one could find that most Americans have Bacon number 2, even if they don't know it.

And I've probably got Erdos number 3 or 4, thanks to a math major friend.

So that'd make my Erdos-Bacon number 5 or 6.
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
quote:
Bacon number 2 (played frisbee with Ethan Hawke).
Doesn't count. You need to have been in a production with someone for it to count as a connection. Otherwise someone who sold Kevin Bacon some coffee would have a Bacon number of 1.
 
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
For that matter, it is the same with Erdos. You need to co-author an academic paper, not just be friends to establish a link.
 
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
 
OK, Bacon number 3 then; a friend of mine was in a Shakespeare play with Ethan Hawke when they were both teens, and I did an Apocalypse Now (abridged) film with said friend.

Erdos number... if it's got to be an academic paper, that's harder for me. What's the definition of an academic paper? Do college lab reports count? Newspaper articles?
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
No. Published in a lab journal. Your Erdos number is likely infinite, as is mine.
 
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
quote:
Our criterion for inclusion of an edge between vertices u and v is some research collaboration between them resulting in a published work. Any number of additional coauthors is permitted. Not normally included are joint editorships, introductions to books written by others, technical reports, problem sessions, problems posed or solved in problem sections of journals, seminars, very elementary textbooks, books on history, memorial or other tributes, biography, translations, bibliographies, or popular works.
http://www4.oakland.edu/?id=9567&sid=243

Edit to add:
There is a handy calculator at http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/collaborationDistance.html
But you need to at least some idea of your point of entry if your papers are from outside mathematics.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Papa Moose:
Have him help you compose a post here -- that counts as publishing, right?

Heh.
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
No. Published in a lab journal. Your Erdos number is likely infinite, as is mine.

And mine. [Smile]
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
quote:
No. Published in a lab journal. Your Erdos number is likely infinite, as is mine.
But this doesn't mean you're dead.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Why would it?
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
Because I'll bet he still does math.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
So do I. The odds of my being published in any professional science/math journal with my father (or anyone else with a finite Erdos number) are close enough to zero to approximate as such though.
 
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
 
Well, I have published in an academic field, but biochem. I think I have a very high Erdos number, but it would take a lot of research to figure it out (unless my boss published something as an undergrad- he was in math). But I imagine at some point, there is a link to a mathematician- probably through the structural people. For Bacon number, I was in a beauty pageant as well as school plays. It is possible one of those people went on to have a career.
So, long story short, I got nothing.
 
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
When will we see an XKCD about the pioneer anomaly?

XKCD teaches me lots of cool things. Like the other day I learned about the Voynich manuscript.

I had to read wikipedia to figure out the Erdos thing too. When I read it, there was no mention of the comic yet, so I got the fun of making the connections myself.

I just found out about the mouseovers not long ago, so I had to go back to the beginning to read all the mouseovers. Sometimes they're the best part.
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
quote:
So do I.
Then you're not dead either.
 
Posted by Xann. (Member # 11482) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tatiana:

I just found out about the mouseovers not long ago, so I had to go back to the beginning to read all the mouseovers. Sometimes they're the best part.

I was lucky, before I was even able to click a link to XKCD someone here on hatrack told me to mouse over ever comic.
 
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
 
I didn't even know what an Erdos number was until last night, and know I'm sad that mine will probably never be finite. [Frown]

... but I hate writing academic papers, and so while I'd love to have a finite Erdos number, I'm glad I never have to endure the misery of writing another one in my life (knock on wood)...
 
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:
Our criterion for inclusion of an edge between vertices u and v is some research collaboration between them resulting in a published work. Any number of additional coauthors is permitted. Not normally included are joint editorships, introductions to books written by others, technical reports, problem sessions, problems posed or solved in problem sections of journals, seminars, very elementary textbooks, books on history, memorial or other tributes, biography, translations, bibliographies, or popular works.
http://www4.oakland.edu/?id=9567&sid=243

Edit to add:
There is a handy calculator at http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/collaborationDistance.html
But you need to at least some idea of your point of entry if your papers are from outside mathematics.

Hey, the school you linked to is my school!

I didn't realize Google had that kind of reach. I also didn't realize we had anything to offer other than nursing and teaching.

Edit to add: And I talked to OSC on the phone briefly whilst discussing material that was in one of my posts...I choose to count that. So my number is 1.
 
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
 
Wouldn't practically everyone end up with a Hatrack number of at least 2-3? It seems really easy to get someone to reply to at least one of your posts with a number of at least 2.
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
Hmm... it seems everyone is focusing on the Erdos number, and no one seems to be noticing that the comic strip uses the word "dead" three times, and that Erdos is rising from the dead in the last panel.

Kinda missing the point, I think.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
Hmm... it seems everyone is focusing on the Erdos number, and no one seems to be noticing that the comic strip uses the word "dead" three times, and that Erdos is rising from the dead in the last panel.

Kinda missing the point, I think.

[Confused]
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
BTW, Kevin Bacon is in Mystic River with Tim Robbins, who was in a play at Plattsburgh State University of NY. Dr. Ruth Klein, who was a theater professor and directed the play, had to play a part because the actor that had originally been cast dropped out. Anyone who did theater at SUNY Plattsburgh under Dr. Klein (such as my wife) would have Bacon number of 3. Anyone at that time period who was in any theatrical production at Plattsburgh that wasn't under Ruth Klein (such as myself) would certainly have a Bacon number of no greater than 4.

Also: Can musicians claim a Bacon number relationship based on musicians they've played with that have played with the Bacon Brothers?
 
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
Anyone who did theater at SUNY Plattsburgh under Dr. Klein (such as my wife) would have Bacon number of 3. Anyone at that time period who was in any theatrical production at Plattsburgh that wasn't under Ruth Klein (such as myself) would certainly have a Bacon number of no greater than 4.

Technically that's not true. They (and you and your wife) would have had to be in a play with her or someone who acted with her in order to have a Bacon number, not just work under her.
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
Huh. So directors and producers that work directly with Kevin Bacon have infinite Bacon numbers?
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Strider:
interesting Plaid, didn't the girl who played Winnie in The Wonder Years become a mathematician?

Danica McKellar. She played Winnie Cooper, and she's written several books on mathematics.
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
Bacon number 2 (played frisbee with Ethan Hawke).
Doesn't count. You need to have been in a production with someone for it to count as a connection. Otherwise someone who sold Kevin Bacon some coffee would have a Bacon number of 1.
Or, you know, someone who sold Bacon bacon.
 
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
Unless they starred on screen with him, yes.

It's actually something of an evolving relationship. Used to be it was only movies... though it was then opened to non-talk-show television, and then opened even wider. Not sure what would constitute true "Bacon number" at this point.

To me, adding anything beyond movies takes a lot of the challenge and interest out of the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" concept, and as such, the "Bacon Number" concept. If you can get to the level of "So-and-so was in a third grade play with so-and-so, who was in a movie with Kevin Bacon", it just gets silly.
 
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
and it wasn't in the first place? LOL
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
Hmm... it seems everyone is focusing on the Erdos number, and no one seems to be noticing that the comic strip uses the word "dead" three times, and that Erdos is rising from the dead in the last panel.

Kinda missing the point, I think.

[Confused]
What she said. It was explained in some of the links on the first page, or there's Tom's explanation:
quote:
Whereas entertainers might all be said to have a Kevin Bacon number -- i.e. their degree of separation from Kevin Bacon -- Erdos was named as a collaborator on so many papers in the hard sciences that many scientists of a certain age can be said to have a Paul Erdos number.

Unfortunately, Erdos is dead. There is therefore no way for someone to ever improve his or her own Erdos number beyond two degrees of separation, unless of course Erdos returns from the dead and is willing to put his name on a paper.


 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan:
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
Anyone who did theater at SUNY Plattsburgh under Dr. Klein (such as my wife) would have Bacon number of 3. Anyone at that time period who was in any theatrical production at Plattsburgh that wasn't under Ruth Klein (such as myself) would certainly have a Bacon number of no greater than 4.

Technically that's not true. They (and you and your wife) would have had to be in a play with her or someone who acted with her in order to have a Bacon number, not just work under her.
Technically, at least by all the definitions I've read, you would have to be in a film with someone who was in a film . . . . with someone who was in a film with Kevin Bacon to have a finite Kevin Bacon number. Stage doesn't count, its got to be on film.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
Forget about Bacon numbers. Who cares about Kevin Bacon anyway.

What is your Star Trek number? (just invented here)

If you have had a speaking role in any Star Trek television episode or movie, you have a Star Trek number of zero. If you have had a speaking role in any theatrical production (stage or film) with someone who has a Star Trek number 0, you have a Star Trek number of 1.

Likewise one can have a Kirk number (or a Picard, Sisco, Janeway, Archer number). Only Shatner has a Kirk number of zero. Anyone who has shared a scene with Shatner in a Star Trek Episode or movie has a Kirk number of one. Anyone who has been in a theatrical production with someone who has been in a Star Trek scene with Kirk, has a Kirk number of 2 and so on. (Appearing with Shatner in something other than Star Trek does not count).

I was in a church production of Guys and Dolls with a friend who was in several college productions with Clayton Rohner who guest starred in the TNG episode "Too Short a Season". This gives me a Star Trek number of 2, a Picard number of 3 (since Rohner appeared in scenes with Picard) and a Kirk number of 4 since Picard and Kirk shared scenes in the movie "Star Trek, Generations."

Didn't Picard and Sisko meet in one of the early DS9 episodes? If so, I also have me a Sisko number of 4. Did Janeway ever appear with either Picard or Sisko?
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
"In the future, everyone will have his own number for 15 minutes."
--Andy Warhol
 
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
 
quote:
Did Janeway ever appear with either Picard or Sisko?
I remember seeing her give Picard orders by screen because I remember it confused the heck out of me. Apparently, it was one of the movies - after she'd made it back from the Delta quadrant and got promoted to Admiral. I don't know my Trek timeline well enough to know what that would be.
 
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
 
What is Chris Pine's Kirk number?
 
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
 
My mother did research work for Star Trek 4, as when that movie went into production she was woring heavily on whale research for a children's science book on whales and someone in production asked her to assist with the whale song and whale behavior portions of the movie. People like that don't go into credits unfortunately [Smile]
 
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
 
According to Rabbit's rules, Chris Pine would have a Kirk number of 2. Though, one might expand the rules to give him a Kirk number of 0.
 
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by FlyingCow:
To me, adding anything beyond movies takes a lot of the challenge and interest out of the "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" concept, and as such, the "Bacon Number" concept. If you can get to the level of "So-and-so was in a third grade play with so-and-so, who was in a movie with Kevin Bacon", it just gets silly.

Darn, there went my Bacon Number.
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by FlyingCow:
According to Rabbit's rules, Chris Pine would have a Kirk number of 2. Though, one might expand the rules to give him a Kirk number of 0.

Perhaps we should call that a second order Kirk number to distinguish it from the original Kirk number.
 
Posted by swbarnes2 (Member # 10225) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by FlyingCow:
Unless they starred on screen with him, yes.

It's actually something of an evolving relationship. Used to be it was only movies... though it was then opened to non-talk-show television,

By that definition, I have a Kevin Bacon number of 2.

Which pretty much proves how silly that counting scheme is.
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
quote:
What she said. It was explained in some of the links on the first page, or there's Tom's explanation:
Erdos referred to people who didn't do math as being "dead." I assume this is similar to the maxim that an unexamined life is not worth living.

He also said that when he died he would stop becoming dumber. But instead of using the word "die" he used the word "leave" or "left."

Yes, the Erdos number is an important part of the strip, but the "apocolypse" when the "Dead walk the earth" is a pretty obvious reference, but nobody seemed to notice. The earth IS full of "dead" people. (But they don't know they're dead.)
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
Erdos referred to people who didn't do math as being "dead."

I had forgotten about that peculiarity of his.


quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
I assume this is similar to the maxim that an unexamined life is not worth living.

More likely it was a facet of his rather odd life outlook. I'm sure that according to his perspective, I am not only dead, but was never alive. Never having done graduate-level math, let alone journal-level.

I am oddly ok with that. I was raised by two math PhDs (well, one's physics, but close enough), but they have a family, in addition to doing math. I prefer that outlook to Erdos'.
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
quote:
I'm sure that according to his perspective, I am not only dead, but was never alive. Never having done graduate-level math, let alone journal-level.
I'm not sure that's true. Link

quote:
Throughout his life Erdös was drawn to areas of mathematics that did not require excessive technical knowledge; many problems that Erdös stated can be easily understood by high school students.
I think the whole story is worth reading. The man had a very interesting outlook. But I particularly like this part:
quote:
The press tends to have stressed Erdös's many eccentricities and child-like dependence, painting a picture of a single-minded champion of an arcane world. To a certain extent, of course, this portrait is true, but to his mathematical friends he was far more. His warmth and compassion for his fellow mathematicians are as legendary as the dazzling body of work he left behind. A man who carried all his possessions in one small suitcase, he always found ways to help colleagues, even total strangers. The two times he lectured in India he arranged to have his fees paid to the impoverished widow of the great Indian mathematician, Ramanujan, a woman he had never met. In 1984 he won the $50,000 Wolf prize, by far the most money he ever received at one time in his life. He used $30,0000 to endow a postdoctoral fellowship at the Technion in Israel in the name of his mother and gave most of the rest to needy relatives and colleagues. "I kept only seven hundred and twenty dollars," Erdös said, "and I remember someone commenting that for me even that was a lot of money to keep."

The obituary of Erdös that ran in the Washington Post ended abruptly with the painful line "he left no immediate survivors." This bothered Charles Krauthammer, who wrote a touching editorial. In it he told the story of a young mathematician who wanted to go to Harvard but was short of money. "Erdös arranged to see him and lent him $1,000," Krauthammer wrote, "He told the young man he could pay it back when he was able to. Recently, the young man called Graham to say that he had gone through Harvard and now was teaching at Michigan and could finally pay the money back. What should he do?

"Graham consulted Erdös. Erdös said, 'Tell him to do with the $1,000 what I did.' No survivors, indeed."


 
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
I'm not sure that's true. Link

Thanks for sharing that! That was sweet. And informative. [Smile]
 
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by AvidReader:
quote:
Did Janeway ever appear with either Picard or Sisko?
I remember seeing her give Picard orders by screen because I remember it confused the heck out of me. Apparently, it was one of the movies - after she'd made it back from the Delta quadrant and got promoted to Admiral. I don't know my Trek timeline well enough to know what that would be.
It was at the beginning of the last movie, "Nemesis." I don't know all the years and timeline details, either.
 
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
 
Nemesis was so bad, 'lorewise,' from start to finish that none of it should be considered canon.

(it was also a horrifically bad movie, but, you know, details)
 
Posted by Dink Meeker (Member # 12106) on :
 
i love how xkcd mentions orson scott cards books
 
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Nemesis was so bad, 'lorewise,' from start to finish that none of it should be considered canon.

(it was also a horrifically bad movie, but, you know, details)

I liked Nemesis, it is what got me into Star Trek in the first place.
 
Posted by Hedwig (Member # 2315) on :
 
I heard Nemesis was bad. I didn't realize it was that bad.
 
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
 
quote:
Nemesis was so bad, 'lorewise,' from start to finish that none of it should be considered canon.

(it was also a horrifically bad movie, but, you know, details)

We'll just have to agree to disagree. [Smile]
 
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 
Its basically Wrath of Khan I think reimaged.
 
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
 
Nemesis was a 'decent' movie, but was composed completely out of pieces from earlier movies. (Data/Spock's death, fight with a bird of prey that can fire when cloaked). If it WAS one's first Star Trek movie it probably would have been pretty interesting. If you'd already seen the other movies, though, it's not nearly as impressive because you've already seen the entire movie done better (and for the most part, with effects that were just as impressive).
 
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
 
I knew what the Erdős number was and still didn't get the comic on my own. I knew Erdős was a great mathematician, but I didn't know a lower Erdős was "better".
 
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
I've played guitar with someone who played guitar with someone who played keyboards with the Beatles. So does that make my Beatles number 3?
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tatiana:
I've played guitar with someone who played guitar with someone who played keyboards with the Beatles. So does that make my Beatles number 3?

I met Richard Dawkins who was friends with Douglas Adams who played guitar with Pink Floyd...so...ummmm, what does that make me?
 
Posted by Leonide (Member # 4157) on :
 
Ooh, that's right! And I've met Lalla Ward who was married to Tom Baker so my Doctor Who number is like 2!

Or something like that. [Smile]
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
quote:
so...ummmm, what does that make me?
A name dropper.
 
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
 
Heyyyyy...I resemble that remark.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
You asked!

[Wink]
 
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
 
Anyone else go to TV Tropes and get stuck there for too long after reading the current xkcd?

(I've gone there before, but the comic reminded me of it.)
 
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Strider:
quote:
Originally posted by Tatiana:
I've played guitar with someone who played guitar with someone who played keyboards with the Beatles. So does that make my Beatles number 3?

I met Richard Dawkins who was friends with Douglas Adams who played guitar with Pink Floyd...so...ummmm, what does that make me?
My guitar teacher was a student of a guitar player who was a student of Segovia, so my guitar student of Sevogia number must be 3.

Come to that, I studied with a composer who studied under a composer who worked with Stravinsky, who worked with Debussy, so my Debussy composer number must be 4, my Stravinsky number being 3. Unfortunately for me the above two numbers are true for virtually every composition student in the world.
 
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
Thats why the Erdos project provides a handy Erdos number distribution chart in order to determine which numbers are truly remarkable [Wink]
http://www4.oakland.edu/enp/trivia/
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Cool link, Mucus. (Wow, I thought my dad was prolific! Ye gods and teeny fishies!)
 
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
 
quote:
My guitar teacher was a student of a guitar player who was a student of Segovia, so my guitar student of Sevogia number must be 3.
Same here. Segovia number of 3 and I've only been playing guitar for about 3 years. I think the same could be said of virtually anyone whose ever had a classical guitar lesson or been in a classical guitar master class.
 
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
 
Segovia taught a lot of people, especially in master classes. The guy who plays the my cello pieces, the ones I've posted here before, played for a master class with YoYo Ma. I've worked with him a lot, so I guess I have a YoYo Ma number of 2
 
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
Wanted to be the first to post this one. Notice what Peter is doing in the first two panels, and don't forget to read the mouse-over text. =)

http://xkcd.com/635/

I love it!
 
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
This one is one of the best, even if it isn't todays. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tatiana:
Wanted to be the first to post this one. Notice what Peter is doing in the first two panels, and don't forget to read the mouse-over text. =)

http://xkcd.com/635/

I love it!

That has to be poison he's putting out.
 
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
 
Brilliant.
 
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 
poison?
 
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 
Sure. Tom Lehrer has his pigeons, and Peter Wiggin has his squirrels.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
And maybe we'll do in a squirrel or two!
 
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
 
No doubt this is the new mnemonic in electronics class. Where I work we all tacked this up on our wall. But then, where I work, with great current squared times resistance comes great responsibility.
 
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
 
Bump because the new xkcd references OSC in the alt text.
 
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
 
Yep. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
I loved that moment in Lost Boys. Actually I loved that whole book, but that was a particularly good moment: I may have to read it again right ... now.

Hobbes [Smile]
 


Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2