[2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Blame Quintushalls for this.

Moderators: NeatNit, Kimra

Quintushalls
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:32 pm

[2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Quintushalls »

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db ... 2477#comic

Is the joke about business cycles, otherwise I have no clue what they are talking about. It doesn't appear the graph shows a wave function.

Also, I had to look this up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theramin
is an early electronic musical instrument controlled without discernible physical contact from the player. It is named after its Russian inventor, Professor Léon Theremin, who patented the device in 1928. The controlling section usually consists of two metal antennas which sense the position of the player's hands and control oscillators for frequency with one hand, and amplitude (volume) with the other, so it can be played without being touched. The electric signals from the theremin are amplified and sent to a loudspeaker.
What does that have to do with the price of eggs?

Dammit Weinersmith, you hurt my brain!

nice1

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by nice1 »

No, it's a quantum-mechanics joke - as soon as you observe a system, the wave function collapses. So by checking his model, the economy collapsed


... so thát's what happened!

User avatar
Sahan
"I promise you no penis jokes."
Posts: 4361
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:20 am
Location: Perth, Australia
Contact:

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Sahan »

This is again, one of those jokes that attempts to get a laugh by alienating people who aren't familiar with the concept.

In quantum mechanics, a fundamental particle's wavefunction is used to describe the probablity of the particle being in one of several states. When a particle is observed (meaning that a fundamental property is measured), it's state is known definitively, and is no longer described by that wavefunction (The whole Schroedinger's Cat phenomenon). Historically, this was referred to as 'collapsing the wavefunction'. So the joke here is that the economy collapsed when it was observed by the two characters, supposedy like fundamental particles wavefunctions do in quantum mechanics (though not actually).

TL;DR: The economy collapsed when it was observed! That is the punchline! Laugh.
Last edited by Sahan on Fri Dec 30, 2011 11:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Destructicus wrote: Alt text:
"I wonder if chemists feel bad that they're always left out of these sorts of jokes."

Since when is chemistry not a science?

User avatar
DonRetrasado
los más retrasadadados
Posts: 2845
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:27 am
Location: ¡Canadia!

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by DonRetrasado »

I genuinely did not get this one.
Astrogirl wrote:Lethal, nobody wants to know about your herpes.
Lethal Interjection wrote:That's good to know. I can avoid a few awkward phone calls now.

User avatar
Sahan
"I promise you no penis jokes."
Posts: 4361
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:20 am
Location: Perth, Australia
Contact:

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Sahan »

I explained it, the punchline is based on a fundamental idea of quantum mechanics (A wavefunction collapses under observation). Trouble is, that idea is really an analogy to what actually happens, so it's really just a very nerdy pun.
Destructicus wrote: Alt text:
"I wonder if chemists feel bad that they're always left out of these sorts of jokes."

Since when is chemistry not a science?

Invalide

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Invalide »

It was funny. And there's nothing wrong with making jokes that some people won't get.

Quintushalls
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 2:32 pm

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Quintushalls »

Invalide wrote:It was funny. And there's nothing wrong with making jokes that some people won't get.


That's fine, but the economics part was misleading. I think it needed another panel to tie it together. Otherwise, it is an observation without a punchline (Get it?).

dmt

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by dmt »

It took me a moment, but this is perhaps the funniest pun I've ever seen in a comic. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Pitch Hitter
[Insert Here]
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:29 am

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Pitch Hitter »

congratulations on reading your first comic

Fucking Owned

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Fucking Owned »

Pitch Hitter wrote:congratulations on reading your first comic
Congratulations on your understanding of the English language.

User avatar
DonRetrasado
los más retrasadadados
Posts: 2845
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:27 am
Location: ¡Canadia!

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by DonRetrasado »

I'm so happy for everyone!
Astrogirl wrote:Lethal, nobody wants to know about your herpes.
Lethal Interjection wrote:That's good to know. I can avoid a few awkward phone calls now.

User avatar
Pitch Hitter
[Insert Here]
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:29 am

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Pitch Hitter »

I used to think I understood it pretty well, but your post has me thrown.

There's a dissonance between the fact that it's a parody of my post and that the author intends to cast doubt on my understanding of the English language. The idea my post was implying was meant by me to be seen as true, dmt has only read one comic and this is it. No irony or sarcasm is to be found in the post, although perhaps in the real world as it is unlikely that this is the first comic dmt has ever read. My post meant what it said.

Fucking Owned (herein referred to as FO), uses the same framework as "congratulations on reading your first comic", but changes it to say "congratulations on your understanding of the english language". FO is saying that I do not understand the English language, but his chosen method of conveying this makes it sound like he is truly saying that I do understand it and that to understand English is not a good thing. FO denigrates English rather than Pitch Hitter.

I believe what FO meant was that my lack of capitalisation and punctuation showed a lack of understanding of english. However, understanding a language and being able to express yourself within it are not the same thing. It is generally agreed that when a person can make themselves understood in English, they can understand others trivially.

I understand what has happened. FO is not a witty person. FO has chosen to "throw my words in my face", however FO has a very weak throwing arm and has inadvertently shown his lack of understanding of English, the very accusation he levelled against me! What a pity.

PS. There is a strong possibility that dmt and Fucking Owned are the same person. In which case I would say, Jesus, pick a name. Pick a fucking name.

User avatar
Edminster
Tested positive for Space-AIDS
Posts: 8832
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:53 pm
Location: Internet
Contact:

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Edminster »

Pitch Hitter wrote:PS. There is a strong possibility that dmt and Fucking Owned are the same person. In which case I would say, Jesus, pick a name. Pick a fucking name.
Unless FO can commute from a Bioengineering research lab in Boston to Glasgow in four and a half hours, I doubt it is the same person posting under both names.

What I am saying is that dmt is going to doom us all with a superplague or shove us into a Rudy Rucker-esque technorganic utopia.
ol qwerty bastard wrote:bitcoin is backed by math, and math is intrinsically perfect and logically consistent always

gödel stop spreading fud

User avatar
Pitch Hitter
[Insert Here]
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:29 am

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Pitch Hitter »

Well I guess it's charming that he stood up for another stranger?


Idiotically, but still, it's charming.

Apples are an okay fruit.

Re: [2011-Dec-30] ExplainSMBC: Business Cycles?

Post by Apples are an okay fruit. »

Huh, whether the comic was funny or not, and however weak an internet rebuttal might have been, you're still a prick.

And I'm a prick for pointing it out.

Ladies and Gentlemen: The Internet - Asshats all the way down.

Post Reply