Spurious correlation #4,923 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and the second variable is Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. The chart goes from 2011 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and the second variable is Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. The chart goes from 2011 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

The 'bad luck brian' meme is so old and overused that it made people seek out new sources of entertainment, leading them to minutePhysics. It seems like bad luck for the meme, but it's actually a stroke of good luck for science enthusiasts. They just couldn't resist the attraction of learning about physics, and it all adds up to a positively charged surge in comments on the videos. It's like the meme was destined to create a 'commentum' of scientific discussions! Who knew that bad luck could bring about such a quantum leap in engagement with minutePhysics?

^{Show image generation prompt} Create a meme inspired by the bad luck brian meme that in some way references Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Try to emulate the style of the meme - don’t violate the copyright, just make it look and feel like the original meme.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how increases in Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme positively influenced Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos

Journal of Internet Culture and Memetics

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some cartoons and childrens' shows that you watched that are related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we set out to uncover the intriguing, and dare I say, comical connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the relationship between these seemingly disparate entities might initially appear as tenacious as a marathon runner, our findings suggest otherwise. Our research team adopted a light-hearted approach by harnessing data from Google Trends and YouTube, and our results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9206329 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 2011 to 2023. This striking correlation hints at a potential linkage between internet humor and scientific curiosity, demonstrating that even in the world of empirical research, a dash of levity can unexpectedly emerge like a punchline in a serious debate. Thus, we propose that further investigation and a pinch of good fortune might shed light on this unconventional relationship, leaving us all to wonder, could 'Bad Luck Brian' truly be the unsung muse of scientific inquiry?

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the internet continues to be a treasure trove of the sublime and the ridiculous, it is no surprise that the world of memes has emerged as a cultural force to be reckoned with. Among the myriad memes that have graced our screens, 'Bad Luck Brian' stands out as an embodiment of inexplicable misfortune, capturing the zeitgeist of online humor with an uncanny ability to elicit laughter and sympathy simultaneously. Simultaneously, the realm of educational content on YouTube has seen a meteoric rise, with channels such as MinutePhysics engaging audiences with their enlightening yet accessible explorations of scientific phenomena.
In this study, we delve into the curious intersection of these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, seeking to unearth any potential connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the level of engagement, as manifested by total comments, on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the juxtaposition of a meme embodying a character plagued by ill fate and the intellectually stimulating landscape of physics education may seem as incongruous as a pickaxe at a tea party, we could not resist the tantalizing prospect of exploring the unforeseen bonds that link these disparate elements of internet culture.
Our endeavor was no mere flight of fancy; rather, it was guided by the earnest pursuit of understanding the whimsical and often unpredictable nature of viral content and its unforeseen impact on the consumption patterns of educational content in the digital sphere. By employing a rigorous empirical approach, and perhaps a touch of whimsy, we aim to shed light on the shadowy realms of internet virality and its potential influence on the digital discourse surrounding scientific content. In doing so, we hope to add a satirical yet scholarly note to the ongoing conversation about the interplay between internet culture, humor, and scientific curiosity.
Unwavering in our quest, we sought to bridge the proverbial chasm between jest and science, recognizing that even in the most unexpected corners of the digital domain, there may lurk connections waiting to be unveiled. In the following sections, we detail the methodology employed in this investigation and offer a peek into the enlightening findings that seek to unravel the enigmatic link between 'Bad Luck Brian' and the commentary landscape of MinutePhysics videos. Join us as we embark on a journey through the labyrinthine corridors of internet culture and scientific inquiry, filled with statistical rigour, unexpected chuckles, and the occasional 'Eureka!' moment. As we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic entanglement between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics, we invite the reader to embrace this whimsical quest with open minds and a readiness for a mirthful revelation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

To comprehend the curious connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos, we must first navigate through the scholarly landscape to uncover clues and insights that may shed light on this uncharted terrain.

Smith and Doe (2015) examined the impact of internet memes on digital engagement, uncovering the intricate ways in which humor and relatability can drive online interactions. Similarly, Jones et al. (2018) delved into the psychology of viral content, unraveling the mysteries behind why certain memes resonate with audiences on a profound level. These seminal works provided a solid foundation for our exploration of the 'Bad Luck Brian' phenomenon and its potential reverberations in the realm of educational content.

In "Viral Visions: Understanding the Power of Internet Memes," the authors delve into the socio-cultural implications of memes, offering a comprehensive analysis of how these digital artifacts become woven into the fabric of our online experiences. Moreover, "The Science of Internet Humor: A Comprehensive Study," provides a detailed examination of the psychological and cognitive processes underlying the reception of humorous internet content, laying the groundwork for understanding the whimsical allure of 'Bad Luck Brian' and its potential impact on viewers' interactions with MinutePhysics videos.

Venturing beyond the realm of academic literature, we encounter a treasure trove of non-fiction works that captivate the imagination and offer tantalizing glimpses into the intersection of humor and scientific exploration. "Quantum Physics for Babies" and "The Physics of Everyday Things" beckon readers with their engaging expositions of scientific principles, offering a playful yet informative lens through which to view the world of physics. The fictional domain also holds surprises, with titles such as "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" and "Good Omens" weaving together elements of cosmic whimsy and inexplicable misfortune, mirroring the quirky essence of 'Bad Luck Brian' and the captivating allure of MinutePhysics.

As we tread further into the realm of unexpected connections, we must not overlook the cartoons and children's shows that have shaped our understanding of humor and scientific inquiry. From the zany escapades of "The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius" to the whimsical charm of "Phineas and Ferb," these animated delights offer a kaleidoscopic view of the intersection between playful humor and the ineffable wonders of the scientific world. In the next section, we unveil our findings, drawing from this eclectic mix of literature and cultural artifacts to unravel the mysterious interplay between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics, embarking on a journey peppered with chuckles and serendipitous discoveries.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and YouTube . You used data from 2011 to 2023

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we set out to uncover the intriguing, and dare I say, comical connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the relationship between these seemingly disparate entities might initially appear as tenacious as a marathon runner, our findings suggest otherwise. Our research team adopted a light-hearted approach by harnessing data from Google Trends and YouTube, and our results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9206329 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 2011 to 2023. This striking correlation hints at a potential linkage between internet humor and scientific curiosity, demonstrating that even in the world of empirical research, a dash of levity can unexpectedly emerge like a punchline in a serious debate. Thus, we propose that further investigation and a pinch of good fortune might shed light on this unconventional relationship, leaving us all to wonder, could 'Bad Luck Brian' truly be the unsung muse of scientific inquiry?

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the internet continues to be a treasure trove of the sublime and the ridiculous, it is no surprise that the world of memes has emerged as a cultural force to be reckoned with. Among the myriad memes that have graced our screens, 'Bad Luck Brian' stands out as an embodiment of inexplicable misfortune, capturing the zeitgeist of online humor with an uncanny ability to elicit laughter and sympathy simultaneously. Simultaneously, the realm of educational content on YouTube has seen a meteoric rise, with channels such as MinutePhysics engaging audiences with their enlightening yet accessible explorations of scientific phenomena.
In this study, we delve into the curious intersection of these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, seeking to unearth any potential connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the level of engagement, as manifested by total comments, on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the juxtaposition of a meme embodying a character plagued by ill fate and the intellectually stimulating landscape of physics education may seem as incongruous as a pickaxe at a tea party, we could not resist the tantalizing prospect of exploring the unforeseen bonds that link these disparate elements of internet culture.
Our endeavor was no mere flight of fancy; rather, it was guided by the earnest pursuit of understanding the whimsical and often unpredictable nature of viral content and its unforeseen impact on the consumption patterns of educational content in the digital sphere. By employing a rigorous empirical approach, and perhaps a touch of whimsy, we aim to shed light on the shadowy realms of internet virality and its potential influence on the digital discourse surrounding scientific content. In doing so, we hope to add a satirical yet scholarly note to the ongoing conversation about the interplay between internet culture, humor, and scientific curiosity.
Unwavering in our quest, we sought to bridge the proverbial chasm between jest and science, recognizing that even in the most unexpected corners of the digital domain, there may lurk connections waiting to be unveiled. In the following sections, we detail the methodology employed in this investigation and offer a peek into the enlightening findings that seek to unravel the enigmatic link between 'Bad Luck Brian' and the commentary landscape of MinutePhysics videos. Join us as we embark on a journey through the labyrinthine corridors of internet culture and scientific inquiry, filled with statistical rigour, unexpected chuckles, and the occasional 'Eureka!' moment. As we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic entanglement between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics, we invite the reader to embrace this whimsical quest with open minds and a readiness for a mirthful revelation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[METHODOLOGY]

As we ventured into the unconventional realm of 'meme-ntific' inquiry, our methodology sought to capture the essence of internet culture while maintaining the rigors of empirical research. Our data collection journey resembled traversing the nooks and crannies of an ever-expanding digital emporium, employing a combination of Google Trends and YouTube as our primary sources of information regarding the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and MinutePhysics videos. With a virtual magnifying glass in hand, we scoured the internet landscape from the year 2011 to 2023 (or as one might say, from the days of dancing baby memes to the era of TikTok challenges) to gather the necessary data for our analysis.

To quantify the popularity and prevalence of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme, we turned to the formidable tool of Google Trends. By inputting relevant search terms and meticulously tracking their frequency and fluctuations, we aimed to capture the meteoric rise (or fall) of this iconic meme over the years. We also took into account the thematic evolution of this meme, recognizing that in the ever-changing ocean of internet humor, a meme's fortunes can shift faster than a cat video goes viral.

Simultaneously, we delved into the comment sections of MinutePhysics YouTube videos, treating them as virtual laboratories for observing the behaviors of curious netizens. These comments were meticulously counted, tabulated, and analyzed to glean insights into the patterns of engagement with the captivating world of physics education. As our data collection progressed, we observed that the comment sections of educational videos can be as lively and enigmatic as a comment thread on a cat picture, often combining insightful queries with the occasional pun or cosmic theory jotted down by an enterprising armchair physicist.

To establish a correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' meme popularity and total comments on MinutePhysics videos, we employed sophisticated statistical analyses, including Pearson's correlation coefficient and regression models. These analytical tools were wielded with the precision of a fencer in a swashbuckling duel, aiming to unearth any hints of a meaningful relationship between these seemingly disparate entities. Our quest was not a mere exercise in number-crunching; it was a journey of discovery, aiming to unravel the unforeseen threads that weave together the tapestry of internet humor and intellectual curiosity.

In summary, our methodology blended the elegance of statistical analyses with the whimsy of internet exploration, navigating the uncharted waters of meme culture and educational content to uncover a correlation that may leave one chuckling in disbelief. As we proceed to unveil the vibrant findings of this study in the subsequent section, we invite you to don your academic cap with a touch of humor, for the unexpected connections we reveal may just inspire a gleeful 'Eureka!' amidst the serious scholarly discourse.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and YouTube .

For the time period 2011 to 2023, you found a correlation 0.9206329, r-squared of 0.8475649, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we set out to uncover the intriguing, and dare I say, comical connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the relationship between these seemingly disparate entities might initially appear as tenacious as a marathon runner, our findings suggest otherwise. Our research team adopted a light-hearted approach by harnessing data from Google Trends and YouTube, and our results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9206329 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 2011 to 2023. This striking correlation hints at a potential linkage between internet humor and scientific curiosity, demonstrating that even in the world of empirical research, a dash of levity can unexpectedly emerge like a punchline in a serious debate. Thus, we propose that further investigation and a pinch of good fortune might shed light on this unconventional relationship, leaving us all to wonder, could 'Bad Luck Brian' truly be the unsung muse of scientific inquiry?

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As the internet continues to be a treasure trove of the sublime and the ridiculous, it is no surprise that the world of memes has emerged as a cultural force to be reckoned with. Among the myriad memes that have graced our screens, 'Bad Luck Brian' stands out as an embodiment of inexplicable misfortune, capturing the zeitgeist of online humor with an uncanny ability to elicit laughter and sympathy simultaneously. Simultaneously, the realm of educational content on YouTube has seen a meteoric rise, with channels such as MinutePhysics engaging audiences with their enlightening yet accessible explorations of scientific phenomena.
In this study, we delve into the curious intersection of these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, seeking to unearth any potential connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the level of engagement, as manifested by total comments, on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the juxtaposition of a meme embodying a character plagued by ill fate and the intellectually stimulating landscape of physics education may seem as incongruous as a pickaxe at a tea party, we could not resist the tantalizing prospect of exploring the unforeseen bonds that link these disparate elements of internet culture.
Our endeavor was no mere flight of fancy; rather, it was guided by the earnest pursuit of understanding the whimsical and often unpredictable nature of viral content and its unforeseen impact on the consumption patterns of educational content in the digital sphere. By employing a rigorous empirical approach, and perhaps a touch of whimsy, we aim to shed light on the shadowy realms of internet virality and its potential influence on the digital discourse surrounding scientific content. In doing so, we hope to add a satirical yet scholarly note to the ongoing conversation about the interplay between internet culture, humor, and scientific curiosity.
Unwavering in our quest, we sought to bridge the proverbial chasm between jest and science, recognizing that even in the most unexpected corners of the digital domain, there may lurk connections waiting to be unveiled. In the following sections, we detail the methodology employed in this investigation and offer a peek into the enlightening findings that seek to unravel the enigmatic link between 'Bad Luck Brian' and the commentary landscape of MinutePhysics videos. Join us as we embark on a journey through the labyrinthine corridors of internet culture and scientific inquiry, filled with statistical rigour, unexpected chuckles, and the occasional 'Eureka!' moment. As we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic entanglement between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics, we invite the reader to embrace this whimsical quest with open minds and a readiness for a mirthful revelation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our study revealed a rather remarkable correlation between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. Our analysis yielded a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9206329, indicating a robust positive relationship between these seemingly incongruent phenomena. Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was calculated to be 0.8475649, underscoring the substantial proportion of variation in the total comments on MinutePhysics videos that can be explained by the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme.

This compelling correlation prompts us to consider the unforeseen interplay between internet humor and academic engagement. While it may seem as bizarre as finding a rubber chicken in a physics laboratory, our findings highlight the potential for cultural phenomena such as memes to wield an influence on the discourse surrounding scientific content in the digital realm.

The striking correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which illustrates a scatterplot showcasing the strong positive relationship between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. The upward trend portrayed in the scatterplot serves as a visual testament to the entwined nature of internet humor and scientific curiosity, reminding us that even in the realm of empirical research, there may be unexpected punchlines waiting to be discovered.

These results beckon further exploration into the dynamics of internet virality and its impact on the reception of educational content, invoking the spirit of inquiry with a humorous twist. Our study offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking glimpse into the intricate dance between internet culture and scientific dissemination, challenging us to embrace the unanticipated connections that thread through the digital tapestry of our modern world.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
"Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we set out to uncover the intriguing, and dare I say, comical connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the relationship between these seemingly disparate entities might initially appear as tenacious as a marathon runner, our findings suggest otherwise. Our research team adopted a light-hearted approach by harnessing data from Google Trends and YouTube, and our results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9206329 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 2011 to 2023. This striking correlation hints at a potential linkage between internet humor and scientific curiosity, demonstrating that even in the world of empirical research, a dash of levity can unexpectedly emerge like a punchline in a serious debate. Thus, we propose that further investigation and a pinch of good fortune might shed light on this unconventional relationship, leaving us all to wonder, could 'Bad Luck Brian' truly be the unsung muse of scientific inquiry?

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To comprehend the curious connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos, we must first navigate through the scholarly landscape to uncover clues and insights that may shed light on this uncharted terrain.
Smith and Doe (2015) examined the impact of internet memes on digital engagement, uncovering the intricate ways in which humor and relatability can drive online interactions. Similarly, Jones et al. (2018) delved into the psychology of viral content, unraveling the mysteries behind why certain memes resonate with audiences on a profound level. These seminal works provided a solid foundation for our exploration of the 'Bad Luck Brian' phenomenon and its potential reverberations in the realm of educational content.
In "Viral Visions: Understanding the Power of Internet Memes," the authors delve into the socio-cultural implications of memes, offering a comprehensive analysis of how these digital artifacts become woven into the fabric of our online experiences. Moreover, "The Science of Internet Humor: A Comprehensive Study," provides a detailed examination of the psychological and cognitive processes underlying the reception of humorous internet content, laying the groundwork for understanding the whimsical allure of 'Bad Luck Brian' and its potential impact on viewers' interactions with MinutePhysics videos.
Venturing beyond the realm of academic literature, we encounter a treasure trove of non-fiction works that captivate the imagination and offer tantalizing glimpses into the intersection of humor and scientific exploration. "Quantum Physics for Babies" and "The Physics of Everyday Things" beckon readers with their engaging expositions of scientific principles, offering a playful yet informative lens through which to view the world of physics. The fictional domain also holds surprises, with titles such as "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" and "Good Omens" weaving together elements of cosmic whimsy and inexplicable misfortune, mirroring the quirky essence of 'Bad Luck Brian' and the captivating allure of MinutePhysics.
As we tread further into the realm of unexpected connections, we must not overlook the cartoons and children's shows that have shaped our understanding of humor and scientific inquiry. From the zany escapades of "The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius" to the whimsical charm of "Phineas and Ferb," these animated delights offer a kaleidoscopic view of the intersection between playful humor and the ineffable wonders of the scientific world. In the next section, we unveil our findings, drawing from this eclectic mix of literature and cultural artifacts to unravel the mysterious interplay between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics, embarking on a journey peppered with chuckles and serendipitous discoveries.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our study revealed a rather remarkable correlation between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. Our analysis yielded a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9206329, indicating a robust positive relationship between these seemingly incongruent phenomena. Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was calculated to be 0.8475649, underscoring the substantial proportion of variation in the total comments on MinutePhysics videos that can be explained by the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme.
This compelling correlation prompts us to consider the unforeseen interplay between internet humor and academic engagement. While it may seem as bizarre as finding a rubber chicken in a physics laboratory, our findings highlight the potential for cultural phenomena such as memes to wield an influence on the discourse surrounding scientific content in the digital realm.
The striking correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which illustrates a scatterplot showcasing the strong positive relationship between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. The upward trend portrayed in the scatterplot serves as a visual testament to the entwined nature of internet humor and scientific curiosity, reminding us that even in the realm of empirical research, there may be unexpected punchlines waiting to be discovered.
These results beckon further exploration into the dynamics of internet virality and its impact on the reception of educational content, invoking the spirit of inquiry with a humorous twist. Our study offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking glimpse into the intricate dance between internet culture and scientific dissemination, challenging us to embrace the unanticipated connections that thread through the digital tapestry of our modern world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The substantial correlation between the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos serves as a testament to the whimsically entangled nature of internet humor and scientific discourse. Our results not only corroborate the existing research on the influence of memes on digital engagement but also add a comedic twist to the serious pursuit of scientific knowledge. As we delve into the implications of this unexpected correlation, it becomes evident that memes, much like a mischievous imp, can leave their mark on the often solemn world of academic inquiry.

Building on the work of Smith and Doe (2015) and Jones et al. (2018), our findings validate the profound impact of internet memes on online interactions, lending empirical support to the notion that humor and relatability wield a significant influence in digital spaces. As these scholars meticulously examined the psychology of viral content, they perhaps could not have anticipated the uproarious reverberations of 'Bad Luck Brian' within the domain of educational physics videos. Much like the unforeseen pratfalls of our titular protagonist, this correlation catches us off guard and draws attention to the unexplored nuances of internet culture's interaction with scientific dissemination.

Our study subtly nods to the fictional and whimsical works cited in the literature review, teasing out the hidden connections between the cosmic capers of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" and the serendipitous correlation we uncovered. After all, who would have thought that the serenade of science could find a dance partner in the misfortune of 'Bad Luck Brian'?

Paralleling the spirit of animated delights such as "The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius" and "Phineas and Ferb," our findings invite us to indulge in a waltz of playful humor intertwined with the inherent wonders of physics. This unexpected harmony of laughter and learning leaves us pondering whether, like a contrived punchline, the interplay between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics is a stroke of fortuitous serendipity or a carefully orchestrated comedic masterpiece.

In conclusion, our results unmask the palpable rapport between the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos, paving the way for further exploration into the convoluted interplay between internet humor and scientific engagement. As we embark on this jocular odyssey of inquiry, let us not forget that even in the most rigorous studies, a sprinkling of whimsy can offer unexpected insights, much like finding a gag gift in the annals of a library – a reminder that scholarly pursuits are not immune to the playful antics of fate.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme and Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we set out to uncover the intriguing, and dare I say, comical connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the relationship between these seemingly disparate entities might initially appear as tenacious as a marathon runner, our findings suggest otherwise. Our research team adopted a light-hearted approach by harnessing data from Google Trends and YouTube, and our results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9206329 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 2011 to 2023. This striking correlation hints at a potential linkage between internet humor and scientific curiosity, demonstrating that even in the world of empirical research, a dash of levity can unexpectedly emerge like a punchline in a serious debate. Thus, we propose that further investigation and a pinch of good fortune might shed light on this unconventional relationship, leaving us all to wonder, could 'Bad Luck Brian' truly be the unsung muse of scientific inquiry?

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the internet continues to be a treasure trove of the sublime and the ridiculous, it is no surprise that the world of memes has emerged as a cultural force to be reckoned with. Among the myriad memes that have graced our screens, 'Bad Luck Brian' stands out as an embodiment of inexplicable misfortune, capturing the zeitgeist of online humor with an uncanny ability to elicit laughter and sympathy simultaneously. Simultaneously, the realm of educational content on YouTube has seen a meteoric rise, with channels such as MinutePhysics engaging audiences with their enlightening yet accessible explorations of scientific phenomena.
In this study, we delve into the curious intersection of these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, seeking to unearth any potential connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the level of engagement, as manifested by total comments, on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the juxtaposition of a meme embodying a character plagued by ill fate and the intellectually stimulating landscape of physics education may seem as incongruous as a pickaxe at a tea party, we could not resist the tantalizing prospect of exploring the unforeseen bonds that link these disparate elements of internet culture.
Our endeavor was no mere flight of fancy; rather, it was guided by the earnest pursuit of understanding the whimsical and often unpredictable nature of viral content and its unforeseen impact on the consumption patterns of educational content in the digital sphere. By employing a rigorous empirical approach, and perhaps a touch of whimsy, we aim to shed light on the shadowy realms of internet virality and its potential influence on the digital discourse surrounding scientific content. In doing so, we hope to add a satirical yet scholarly note to the ongoing conversation about the interplay between internet culture, humor, and scientific curiosity.
Unwavering in our quest, we sought to bridge the proverbial chasm between jest and science, recognizing that even in the most unexpected corners of the digital domain, there may lurk connections waiting to be unveiled. In the following sections, we detail the methodology employed in this investigation and offer a peek into the enlightening findings that seek to unravel the enigmatic link between 'Bad Luck Brian' and the commentary landscape of MinutePhysics videos. Join us as we embark on a journey through the labyrinthine corridors of internet culture and scientific inquiry, filled with statistical rigour, unexpected chuckles, and the occasional 'Eureka!' moment. As we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic entanglement between 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics, we invite the reader to embrace this whimsical quest with open minds and a readiness for a mirthful revelation.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our study revealed a rather remarkable correlation between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. Our analysis yielded a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9206329, indicating a robust positive relationship between these seemingly incongruent phenomena. Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was calculated to be 0.8475649, underscoring the substantial proportion of variation in the total comments on MinutePhysics videos that can be explained by the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme.
This compelling correlation prompts us to consider the unforeseen interplay between internet humor and academic engagement. While it may seem as bizarre as finding a rubber chicken in a physics laboratory, our findings highlight the potential for cultural phenomena such as memes to wield an influence on the discourse surrounding scientific content in the digital realm.
The striking correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which illustrates a scatterplot showcasing the strong positive relationship between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. The upward trend portrayed in the scatterplot serves as a visual testament to the entwined nature of internet humor and scientific curiosity, reminding us that even in the realm of empirical research, there may be unexpected punchlines waiting to be discovered.
These results beckon further exploration into the dynamics of internet virality and its impact on the reception of educational content, invoking the spirit of inquiry with a humorous twist. Our study offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking glimpse into the intricate dance between internet culture and scientific dissemination, challenging us to embrace the unanticipated connections that thread through the digital tapestry of our modern world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the peculiar pairing of 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics has yielded notable insights that tickle the funny bone and stimulate the intellect simultaneously. The robust correlation between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos stands as an intriguing testament to the interplay between internet humor and scientific discourse. It seems that even in the labyrinthine corridors of digital culture, the unexpected union of 'Bad Luck Brian' and MinutePhysics elicits a resounding "Eureka!" from the statistical analysis.

The scatterplot, akin to a comedic duo hitting all the right notes, visually encapsulates the strong positive relationship, leaving us to marvel at the unforeseen synergy between a symbol of misfortune and a bastion of scientific enlightenment. This correlation, as remarkable as stumbling upon a four-leaf clover in a virtual maze, suggests that memes like 'Bad Luck Brian' may wield a subtle yet tangible influence on the engagement with educational content in the digital sphere.

As we wrap up this scholarly escapade infused with a dash of whimsy, we contend that no further investigation is required in this area. After all, when it comes to the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and MinutePhysics, sometimes it's best to acknowledge the unexplainable, embrace the absurd, and leave it to the whims of the internet to weave its delightful mysteries.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Internet Culture and Memetics

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Internet Culture and Viral Phenomena Studies

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos with an abstract of In this empirical study, we set out to uncover the intriguing, and dare I say, comical connection between the popularity of the 'Bad Luck Brian' meme and the total number of comments on MinutePhysics YouTube videos. While the relationship between these seemingly disparate entities might initially appear as tenacious as a marathon runner, our findings suggest otherwise. Our research team adopted a light-hearted approach by harnessing data from Google Trends and YouTube, and our results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9206329 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 2011 to 2023. This striking correlation hints at a potential linkage between internet humor and scientific curiosity, demonstrating that even in the world of empirical research, a dash of levity can unexpectedly emerge like a punchline in a serious debate. Thus, we propose that further investigation and a pinch of good fortune might shed light on this unconventional relationship, leaving us all to wonder, could 'Bad Luck Brian' truly be the unsung muse of scientific inquiry?

ChatGPT:

'Bad Luck Brian' meme, MinutePhysics YouTube videos, meme popularity, correlation, comments, empirical study, Google Trends, YouTube data, correlation coefficient, p-value, internet humor, scientific curiosity, unconventional relationship, scientific inquiry

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.

Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error

Data details

Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'bad luck brian' (without quotes, in the United States)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume is a unique Google thing; the shape of the chart is accurate but the actual numbers are meaningless.

See what else correlates with Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme

Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos
Detailed data title: Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos.
Source: YouTube
See what else correlates with Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos

Correlation r = 0.9206329 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r² = 0.8475649 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 84.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme) over the 13 years from 2011 through 2023.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 8.1E-6.^Show 0.0000080989055120920340000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.92 in 0.00081% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 123,473 random variables^Note You don't actually need 123 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 12 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 12 because we have two variables measured over a period of 13 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.75, 0.98 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!

All values for the years included above: ^Note If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.

	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023
Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme (Relative popularity)	0	65.9	32.5	12.9167	10.1667	7.08333	5.16667	6.16667	3.25	2.16667	1.58333	1.08333	2
Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos (Total comments)	71921	229226	160045	81919	41120	71986	86609	26188	51468	35092	21189	19357	2467

Why this works

Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple^Note Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.

Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. ^{Show the steps to do this.} Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."

# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([0,65.9,32.5,12.9167,10.1667,7.08333,5.16667,6.16667,3.25,2.16667,1.58333,1.08333,2,])
array_2 = np.array([71921,229226,160045,81919,41120,71986,86609,26188,51468,35092,21189,19357,2467,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme"
array_2_name = "Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)

Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. ^Note Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme
Line chart for only Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Unlucky Linkage: Exploring the Correlation between 'Bad Luck Brian' Meme Popularity and Total Comments on MinutePhysics YouTube Videos

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is stellar!

Correlation ID: 4923 · Black Variable ID: 25105 · Red Variable ID: 25526


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: