Spurious correlation #3,705 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of physicists in California and the second variable is Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. The chart goes from 2003 to 2012, 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 The number of physicists in California and the second variable is Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. The chart goes from 2003 to 2012, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the number of physicists in California rose, so did the development of advanced car technology. These physicists were really driving innovation in the automotive industry, leading to faster and more efficient race cars. It seems they were the ones who truly understood the physics of speed, propelling Michael Schumacher to higher rankings. It was a case of Golden State of Mind meets Pole Position!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that emulates a TIME magazine cover, featuring a group of physicists wearing lab coats gathered around a futuristic Formula One car in a California setting. The physicists are meticulously adjusting the car's design, while a satisfied Michael Schumacher stands nearby. Behind them, a graph charts a sharp increase in the number of physicists in California and Schumacher's rapid rise in the Formula One ranking. The image should capture the essence of technological innovation and the intersection of science and sports, visually echoing the style and impact of a compelling TIME magazine cover. Aim for a high level of detail and realism in the depiction. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.

This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: The number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Glitch art Cutsy graphics An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie A TIME magazine cover image a meme
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover image

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both The number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking, in the following situation: As more physicists flocked to California, they collectively applied their knowledge of aerodynamics to improve the design of Michael Schumacher's Formula One car, giving him a competitive edge and boosting his ranking.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A group of physicists in lab coats crowded around a sleek Formula One car in California. They were carefully adjusting the car's design, while Michael Schumacher stood nearby, looking satisfied. In the background, a graph showed a sharp increase in the number of physicists in California, and Schumacher's Formula One ranking rising rapidly.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: A group of physicists in lab coats crowded around a sleek Formula One car in California. They were carefully adjusting the car's design, while Michael Schumacher stood nearby, looking satisfied. In the background, a graph showed a sharp increase in the number of physicists in California, and Schumacher's Formula One ranking rising rapidly. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that emulates a TIME magazine cover, featuring a group of physicists wearing lab coats gathered around a futuristic Formula One car in a California setting. The physicists are meticulously adjusting the car's design, while a satisfied Michael Schumacher stands nearby. Behind them, a graph charts a sharp increase in the number of physicists in California and Schumacher's rapid rise in the Formula One ranking. The image should capture the essence of technological innovation and the intersection of science and sports, visually echoing the style and impact of a compelling TIME magazine cover. Aim for a high level of detail and realism in the depiction.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{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 an increase in The number of physicists in California caused Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings

The Annals of Interdisciplinary Motorsport Studies

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 The number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the quirky yet bewildering relationship between the number of physicists in California and the performance of the legendary Formula One driver, Michael Schumacher. Utilizing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Wikipedia, we delve into this peculiar correlation with the precision of a scientist and the humor of a dad at a barbecue. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784 and p < 0.01 for the period from 2003 to 2012. As we delved into the numbers, it became clear that the connection was more concrete than Schumacher's car tires during a rainy race.

The sheer coincidence of the abundance of physicists and Schumacher's gravity-defying maneuvers on the track prompts the question: is there something about pondering over quantum mechanics that gives California physicists the necessary mental boost to propel Schumacher to new heights? It's like they're silently whispering "race to the top" from behind their lab equipment. Understanding this correlation brings new meaning to the phrase "quantum leap."

The data suggests a correlation so strong that it's almost as if the physicists' collective brainpower is propelling Schumacher forward. It's as if they're saying, "We have the formula (pun intended) for speed!" In our amusement and astonishment, we couldn't help but make a Schumacher-related dad joke or two. Much like Schumacher's driving, this correlation is not something we can sweep under the rug. We propose that future research explores potential causal factors, such as whether Schumacher's car secretly had a quantum physics-themed paint job, or if the physicists were secretly sneaking in "speed boost" equations into their research papers.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The realm of sports and physical sciences have long been considered as distant as the finish line and the starting grid. However, in the spirit of discovering connections that seem more far-fetched than a Formula One car soaring through the Monaco streets, we present findings that may indeed leave you scratching your head more vigorously than a Formula One pit crew before a tire change.
It's quite a mystery, isn't it? The number of physicists in California, a state known for its sunny weather and laid-back vibes, and the Formula One rankings of the legendary Michael Schumacher, a man who's more associated with speed and victory than with equations and lab coats. It's like trying to solve a quantum mechanics problem with a tire iron - it just doesn't seem to add up. But in the world of research, sometimes the most unexpected connections turn out to be the most fascinating. And boy, are we excited to unravel this oddball correlation and take it for a spin on the research track.
It's as if the physicists and Schumacher's feats on the track are entangled in a quantum state of their own, with the physicists exerting influence from afar like some theoretical force acting over distances. You could say it's a Schumacher show with a physics twist - a "Schu-physics," if you will. It's almost as if the Californian physicists are sending waves of intellectual prowess through the air, propelling Schumacher to higher speeds and smoother turns. I guess you could say they're providing a whole new definition to the term "acceleration due to gravity."
In this paper, we aim to delve into this peculiar correlation with all the seriousness of conducting experimental analysis in a lab, while also embracing the absurdity with the enthusiasm of a dad telling a good ol' dad joke at a summer barbecue. Because really, what's research without a few laughs and unexpected connections? We promise, as we unravel this strange phenomenon, we'll keep the technical jargon from spinning out of control and try not to make any "tire-some" puns... but we can't make any promises.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.," the authors find lorem and ipsum. In "Doe and Jones," the authors find lorem and ipsum. "Brown and White" observe lorem and ipsum. The various studies conducted on the subject present a comprehensive understanding of the performance of Formula One driver Michael Schumacher and the number of physicists in California, shedding light on the peculiar correlation that has confounded researchers and motorsport enthusiasts alike.

Turning to the literature on physics and Formula One racing, we find some intriguing non-fiction books that have attempted to elucidate the mysteries of high-speed racing and the underlying scientific principles. Titles such as "The Physics of Speed" and "Engineering Dynamics in Motorsport" offer valuable insights into the physical forces that govern Formula One racing. Now, let's take a moment to appreciate the irony of physicists in California influencing the performance of a renowned Formula One driver, Michael "Schu-mystery" Schumacher. It's like a plot twist straight out of a racing-themed comedy film directed by a physics-loving filmmaker!

On a more imaginative note, let's not forget the realm of fiction, where authors have spun tales that could, in some bizarre parallel universe, tie into the enigmatic relationship between California physicists and Schumacher's Formula One prowess. Works like "The Quantum Racer" and "Schumacher's Last Lap: A Physics Odyssey" paint a whimsical picture of what could be if the laws of physics and the high-octane world of Formula One collided in unexpected ways. It's almost as if Schumacher's car was equipped with a secret button labeled "Quantum Boost" that only the California physicists knew about.

Board games, too, have their place in this discussion, with titles like "Race to the Formula" and "Quantum Track Showdown" offering a playful take on the intersection of speed, strategy, and scientific curiosities. Perhaps tapping into the competitive spirit and intellectual stimulation that come with physics-inspired racing games is akin to the unseen influence of California's physics enthusiasts on Schumacher's astounding feats on the track. It's like a game of Clue, where the suspects are "California Physicists," "Schumacher's Car," and "Inexplicable Quantum Phenomena," and the detectives are scratching their heads, trying to make sense of the correlation before the checkered flag drops.

As we leap into the next section of our research journey, it's clear that the intersection of physics and Formula One racing is more than just a mere curiosity - it's a collision of worlds that invites us to embrace the unexpected intersections of human knowledge and ingenuity. Much like a well-timed dad joke, this correlation gives us a chuckle and then leaves us pondering its intricacies long after the punchline.

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 The number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Wikipedia . You used data from 2003 to 2012

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]]
Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the quirky yet bewildering relationship between the number of physicists in California and the performance of the legendary Formula One driver, Michael Schumacher. Utilizing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Wikipedia, we delve into this peculiar correlation with the precision of a scientist and the humor of a dad at a barbecue. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784 and p < 0.01 for the period from 2003 to 2012. As we delved into the numbers, it became clear that the connection was more concrete than Schumacher's car tires during a rainy race.

The sheer coincidence of the abundance of physicists and Schumacher's gravity-defying maneuvers on the track prompts the question: is there something about pondering over quantum mechanics that gives California physicists the necessary mental boost to propel Schumacher to new heights? It's like they're silently whispering "race to the top" from behind their lab equipment. Understanding this correlation brings new meaning to the phrase "quantum leap."

The data suggests a correlation so strong that it's almost as if the physicists' collective brainpower is propelling Schumacher forward. It's as if they're saying, "We have the formula (pun intended) for speed!" In our amusement and astonishment, we couldn't help but make a Schumacher-related dad joke or two. Much like Schumacher's driving, this correlation is not something we can sweep under the rug. We propose that future research explores potential causal factors, such as whether Schumacher's car secretly had a quantum physics-themed paint job, or if the physicists were secretly sneaking in "speed boost" equations into their research papers.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The realm of sports and physical sciences have long been considered as distant as the finish line and the starting grid. However, in the spirit of discovering connections that seem more far-fetched than a Formula One car soaring through the Monaco streets, we present findings that may indeed leave you scratching your head more vigorously than a Formula One pit crew before a tire change.
It's quite a mystery, isn't it? The number of physicists in California, a state known for its sunny weather and laid-back vibes, and the Formula One rankings of the legendary Michael Schumacher, a man who's more associated with speed and victory than with equations and lab coats. It's like trying to solve a quantum mechanics problem with a tire iron - it just doesn't seem to add up. But in the world of research, sometimes the most unexpected connections turn out to be the most fascinating. And boy, are we excited to unravel this oddball correlation and take it for a spin on the research track.
It's as if the physicists and Schumacher's feats on the track are entangled in a quantum state of their own, with the physicists exerting influence from afar like some theoretical force acting over distances. You could say it's a Schumacher show with a physics twist - a "Schu-physics," if you will. It's almost as if the Californian physicists are sending waves of intellectual prowess through the air, propelling Schumacher to higher speeds and smoother turns. I guess you could say they're providing a whole new definition to the term "acceleration due to gravity."
In this paper, we aim to delve into this peculiar correlation with all the seriousness of conducting experimental analysis in a lab, while also embracing the absurdity with the enthusiasm of a dad telling a good ol' dad joke at a summer barbecue. Because really, what's research without a few laughs and unexpected connections? We promise, as we unravel this strange phenomenon, we'll keep the technical jargon from spinning out of control and try not to make any "tire-some" puns... but we can't make any promises.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To uncover the cryptic connection between the number of physicists in California and the Formula One rankings of Michael Schumacher, we embarked on an investigative journey that was more convoluted than a Formula One track map designed by a confused cartographer. Our research team utilized a mixed-method approach, finely blending quantitative analysis with a sprinkle of whimsy, much like adding just the right amount of spice to an experimental dish. We began by scouring the depths of the internet, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to Wikipedia, where data from 2003 to 2012 awaited our scientific scrutiny.

After gathering a plethora of information, we employed a "quantum statistics" method—okay, not an actual thing, but stay with us here—where we correlated the number of employed physicists in California with Michael Schumacher's Formula One rankings. It was a bit like trying to predict the trajectory of a bouncing tire; however, we maintained our focus and determination, much like Schumacher's laser-like concentration on the race track.

Once we had the data in our research pit stop, we implemented a series of statistical analyses to ascertain the strength of the correlation. Our statistical toolbox contained more tools than a Formula One car's repair kit, and we meticulously examined the data using various techniques, including Pearson's correlation coefficient and regression analysis. We also conducted a thorough sensitivity analysis to ensure our findings remained as robust as Schumacher's driving skills in inclement weather.

Next, we recalibrated our investigation to explore potential confounding variables that could have influenced the relationship between the physicists' numbers and Schumacher's rankings. It was a bit like ensuring that our Formula One car was finely tuned for optimum performance, albeit in the realm of scientific inquiry. We adjusted for variables such as the global economic climate, the number of physics-related patents filed, and even the average amount of caffeine consumed by physicists during crunch time.

As with any rigorous study, we critically evaluated the limitations of our methodology, recognizing that drawing definitive conclusions from the available data was as slippery as navigating a rain-soaked racing circuit. We acknowledged the potential presence of unobserved variables - perhaps even metaphysical forces at play, such as the mysterious influence of Schumacher's lucky racing socks or the cosmic energy emanating from physics laboratories.

Lastly, we channelled our inner detectives to develop a conceptual framework that aimed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms governing this enigmatic relationship. We crafted a theoretical model reminiscent of a finely-tuned racing engine, fusing elements of quantum physics and motorsport dynamics to propose potential pathways through which the physicists' intellectual prowess might have intersected with Schumacher's performance on the track.

While our investigative journey may have been as winding and unpredictable as a series of S-bends on a raceway, we approached our analysis with the meticulousness of a pit crew and the lightheartedness of a group of scientists enjoying a good dad joke together. We assure you, dear reader, that our methodology was as robust as a Formula One car's chassis and our commitment to unveiling this peculiar correlation was unwavering, much like Schumacher's determination to claim victory at every turn. And with that, we rev our engines and venture forth to present the intriguing findings of our research.

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 The number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the quirky yet bewildering relationship between the number of physicists in California and the performance of the legendary Formula One driver, Michael Schumacher. Utilizing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Wikipedia, we delve into this peculiar correlation with the precision of a scientist and the humor of a dad at a barbecue. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784 and p < 0.01 for the period from 2003 to 2012. As we delved into the numbers, it became clear that the connection was more concrete than Schumacher's car tires during a rainy race.

The sheer coincidence of the abundance of physicists and Schumacher's gravity-defying maneuvers on the track prompts the question: is there something about pondering over quantum mechanics that gives California physicists the necessary mental boost to propel Schumacher to new heights? It's like they're silently whispering "race to the top" from behind their lab equipment. Understanding this correlation brings new meaning to the phrase "quantum leap."

The data suggests a correlation so strong that it's almost as if the physicists' collective brainpower is propelling Schumacher forward. It's as if they're saying, "We have the formula (pun intended) for speed!" In our amusement and astonishment, we couldn't help but make a Schumacher-related dad joke or two. Much like Schumacher's driving, this correlation is not something we can sweep under the rug. We propose that future research explores potential causal factors, such as whether Schumacher's car secretly had a quantum physics-themed paint job, or if the physicists were secretly sneaking in "speed boost" equations into their research papers.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find lorem and ipsum. In "Doe and Jones," the authors find lorem and ipsum. "Brown and White" observe lorem and ipsum. The various studies conducted on the subject present a comprehensive understanding of the performance of Formula One driver Michael Schumacher and the number of physicists in California, shedding light on the peculiar correlation that has confounded researchers and motorsport enthusiasts alike.
Turning to the literature on physics and Formula One racing, we find some intriguing non-fiction books that have attempted to elucidate the mysteries of high-speed racing and the underlying scientific principles. Titles such as "The Physics of Speed" and "Engineering Dynamics in Motorsport" offer valuable insights into the physical forces that govern Formula One racing. Now, let's take a moment to appreciate the irony of physicists in California influencing the performance of a renowned Formula One driver, Michael "Schu-mystery" Schumacher. It's like a plot twist straight out of a racing-themed comedy film directed by a physics-loving filmmaker!
On a more imaginative note, let's not forget the realm of fiction, where authors have spun tales that could, in some bizarre parallel universe, tie into the enigmatic relationship between California physicists and Schumacher's Formula One prowess. Works like "The Quantum Racer" and "Schumacher's Last Lap: A Physics Odyssey" paint a whimsical picture of what could be if the laws of physics and the high-octane world of Formula One collided in unexpected ways. It's almost as if Schumacher's car was equipped with a secret button labeled "Quantum Boost" that only the California physicists knew about.
Board games, too, have their place in this discussion, with titles like "Race to the Formula" and "Quantum Track Showdown" offering a playful take on the intersection of speed, strategy, and scientific curiosities. Perhaps tapping into the competitive spirit and intellectual stimulation that come with physics-inspired racing games is akin to the unseen influence of California's physics enthusiasts on Schumacher's astounding feats on the track. It's like a game of Clue, where the suspects are "California Physicists," "Schumacher's Car," and "Inexplicable Quantum Phenomena," and the detectives are scratching their heads, trying to make sense of the correlation before the checkered flag drops.
As we leap into the next section of our research journey, it's clear that the intersection of physics and Formula One racing is more than just a mere curiosity - it's a collision of worlds that invites us to embrace the unexpected intersections of human knowledge and ingenuity. Much like a well-timed dad joke, this correlation gives us a chuckle and then leaves us pondering its intricacies long after the punchline.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the association between the number of physicists in California and the Formula One rankings of Michael Schumacher from 2003 to 2012 are quite, dare we say, positively electrifying. We found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This correlation is so strong, it's almost as if Schumacher's opponents were asking, "What's the force accelerating him forward, anyway?" And the physicists responded, "It's our brains, man!"
The r-squared value of 0.9426049 further solidifies the strength of this remarkable connection. It's like the physicists are providing Schumacher with the precise calculations for the perfect racing line, all while sipping their morning coffee in sunny California. Now, that's what I call "engineering precision."
With a p-value less than 0.01, our findings are statistically significant. And statistically speaking, the odds of this correlation occurring by mere chance are about as rare as a full-course yellow flag at the Monaco Grand Prix - it's just not something you see every day. It's like a physicist walking into a race car mechanic's shop and saying, "I've got the formula for speed!" - a statistical improbability, yet here we are.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually represents the strong correlation we discovered. It's as clear as day that as the number of physicists in California increased, so did Schumacher's Formula One rankings. It's like watching Schumacher speed past his competitors, while the physicists are casually solving differential equations on the sidelines.
In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a link between the abundance of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One rankings. This bizarre yet captivating connection has piqued our curiosity and tickled our funny bones, prompting us to wonder: are the physicists secretly training Schumacher using their quantum brainpower? It's like they're saying, "We've got the unlimited potential, and we're also big fans of unlimited speed!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study has opened the floodgates to a realm where the rubber meets the road, quite literally, in the realm of physics and high-octane racing. While the relationship between the number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One rankings might seem more whimsical than a physics-defying magic trick, our results paint a picture that's as robust as Schumacher's cornering technique.

As we revisited the quirky items in the literature review, such as the potential influence of physicist-saturated California on Schumacher's performance, we found that our results indeed support and even bolster these seemingly outlandish propositions. It's like uncovering a secret dad joke that turns out to be scientifically sound – an unexpected twist that leaves you nodding your head in both amusement and admiration.

Our correlational findings align with previous research, affirming the strength of the link between the concentration of physicists in California and Schumacher's Formula One rankings. It's as if the physicists subtly whispered, "Race to the top," and Schumacher took it to heart, racing his way to glory with their theoretical cheers in the background. It's like the kinship between a dad and their dad jokes – you may not see it coming, but it's there, grounding and uplifting in equal measure.

The nearly perfect correlation coefficient we unearthed echoes the precision of a well-crafted dad joke – it's a seamless connection that leaves an indelible image in the mind, much like Schumacher's exceptional racing prowess. This correlation between California's physicists and Schumacher's rankings is as remarkable as the bond between a dad and their well-worn pun collection – it's unexpected, enduring, and never fails to elicit a response.

The statistical significance of our findings accentuates the robustness of the relationship we've uncovered. The likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is as remote as finding an F1 car in a grocery store parking lot – it's not impossible, but it's definitely a rare occurrence. It's like a physicist walking into a race car mechanic's shop and saying, "I've got the formula for speed!" We're met with incredulity, but the evidence sits before us, unwavering and compelling.

In essence, our results solidify the intriguing connection between the intellectual hub of California's physicists and the high-speed realm of Formula One racing, bringing forth a delightfully unexpected juxtaposition akin to a dad joke expertly timed in the midst of a serious discussion. This correlation is a testament to the intersection of human knowledge, curiosity, and the unanticipated influences that shape our world, much like a dad joke that transcends generations, leaving everyone with a smile that lingers long after the laughter has subsided.

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 The number of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the quirky yet bewildering relationship between the number of physicists in California and the performance of the legendary Formula One driver, Michael Schumacher. Utilizing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Wikipedia, we delve into this peculiar correlation with the precision of a scientist and the humor of a dad at a barbecue. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784 and p < 0.01 for the period from 2003 to 2012. As we delved into the numbers, it became clear that the connection was more concrete than Schumacher's car tires during a rainy race.

The sheer coincidence of the abundance of physicists and Schumacher's gravity-defying maneuvers on the track prompts the question: is there something about pondering over quantum mechanics that gives California physicists the necessary mental boost to propel Schumacher to new heights? It's like they're silently whispering "race to the top" from behind their lab equipment. Understanding this correlation brings new meaning to the phrase "quantum leap."

The data suggests a correlation so strong that it's almost as if the physicists' collective brainpower is propelling Schumacher forward. It's as if they're saying, "We have the formula (pun intended) for speed!" In our amusement and astonishment, we couldn't help but make a Schumacher-related dad joke or two. Much like Schumacher's driving, this correlation is not something we can sweep under the rug. We propose that future research explores potential causal factors, such as whether Schumacher's car secretly had a quantum physics-themed paint job, or if the physicists were secretly sneaking in "speed boost" equations into their research papers.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The realm of sports and physical sciences have long been considered as distant as the finish line and the starting grid. However, in the spirit of discovering connections that seem more far-fetched than a Formula One car soaring through the Monaco streets, we present findings that may indeed leave you scratching your head more vigorously than a Formula One pit crew before a tire change.
It's quite a mystery, isn't it? The number of physicists in California, a state known for its sunny weather and laid-back vibes, and the Formula One rankings of the legendary Michael Schumacher, a man who's more associated with speed and victory than with equations and lab coats. It's like trying to solve a quantum mechanics problem with a tire iron - it just doesn't seem to add up. But in the world of research, sometimes the most unexpected connections turn out to be the most fascinating. And boy, are we excited to unravel this oddball correlation and take it for a spin on the research track.
It's as if the physicists and Schumacher's feats on the track are entangled in a quantum state of their own, with the physicists exerting influence from afar like some theoretical force acting over distances. You could say it's a Schumacher show with a physics twist - a "Schu-physics," if you will. It's almost as if the Californian physicists are sending waves of intellectual prowess through the air, propelling Schumacher to higher speeds and smoother turns. I guess you could say they're providing a whole new definition to the term "acceleration due to gravity."
In this paper, we aim to delve into this peculiar correlation with all the seriousness of conducting experimental analysis in a lab, while also embracing the absurdity with the enthusiasm of a dad telling a good ol' dad joke at a summer barbecue. Because really, what's research without a few laughs and unexpected connections? We promise, as we unravel this strange phenomenon, we'll keep the technical jargon from spinning out of control and try not to make any "tire-some" puns... but we can't make any promises.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the association between the number of physicists in California and the Formula One rankings of Michael Schumacher from 2003 to 2012 are quite, dare we say, positively electrifying. We found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This correlation is so strong, it's almost as if Schumacher's opponents were asking, "What's the force accelerating him forward, anyway?" And the physicists responded, "It's our brains, man!"
The r-squared value of 0.9426049 further solidifies the strength of this remarkable connection. It's like the physicists are providing Schumacher with the precise calculations for the perfect racing line, all while sipping their morning coffee in sunny California. Now, that's what I call "engineering precision."
With a p-value less than 0.01, our findings are statistically significant. And statistically speaking, the odds of this correlation occurring by mere chance are about as rare as a full-course yellow flag at the Monaco Grand Prix - it's just not something you see every day. It's like a physicist walking into a race car mechanic's shop and saying, "I've got the formula for speed!" - a statistical improbability, yet here we are.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually represents the strong correlation we discovered. It's as clear as day that as the number of physicists in California increased, so did Schumacher's Formula One rankings. It's like watching Schumacher speed past his competitors, while the physicists are casually solving differential equations on the sidelines.
In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a link between the abundance of physicists in California and Michael Schumacher's Formula One rankings. This bizarre yet captivating connection has piqued our curiosity and tickled our funny bones, prompting us to wonder: are the physicists secretly training Schumacher using their quantum brainpower? It's like they're saying, "We've got the unlimited potential, and we're also big fans of unlimited speed!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has undoubtedly steered us into the curious world of the interconnectedness between the number of physicists in California and the stellar performance of Michael Schumacher in Formula One racing. It's as if the physicists are providing Schumacher with a quantum boost, making us wonder if they're secretly including "racing formulas" in their scientific equations. After all, who wouldn't want a physicist in their pit crew shouting, "Let's add some 'velocity vector' tactics to the mix"?

Our findings have reinforced the notion that this peculiar correlation between the physics wizzes in California and Schumacher's triumphs on the racetrack is more than just a casual observation. It's as concrete as Schumacher's grip on the steering wheel during a high-speed turn – and just as gripping as a dad joke about racetracks.

Ultimately, this study suggests that the presence of physicists in California may indeed be inexplicably linked to Schumacher's Formula One rankings. It's like the physicists are giving Schumacher a crash course in racing dynamics, without ever leaving the comfort of their sun-soaked labs. You could say it's a case of "accelerated knowledge transmission."

With these electrifying results, we confidently assert that further research in this area is unnecessary. We've exhausted the possibilities, much like Schumacher exhausts a set of tires in a nail-biting race. It's time for us to shift gears and direct our attention to other intriguing correlations – ones that might involve engineers building bridges with nothing but physics puns and high-fives. After all, science is nothing without a good laugh and the occasional, unexpected connection.

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 Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Annals of Interdisciplinary Motorsport Studies

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 Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Quantum Quirks Society

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 Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings with an abstract of This study investigates the quirky yet bewildering relationship between the number of physicists in California and the performance of the legendary Formula One driver, Michael Schumacher. Utilizing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Wikipedia, we delve into this peculiar correlation with the precision of a scientist and the humor of a dad at a barbecue. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9708784 and p < 0.01 for the period from 2003 to 2012. As we delved into the numbers, it became clear that the connection was more concrete than Schumacher's car tires during a rainy race.
The sheer coincidence of the abundance of physicists and Schumacher's gravity-defying maneuvers on the track prompts the question: is there something about pondering over quantum mechanics that gives California physicists the necessary mental boost to propel Schumacher to new heights? It's like they're silently whispering "race to the top" from behind their lab equipment. Understanding this correlation brings new meaning to the phrase "quantum leap."
The data suggests a correlation so strong that it's almost as if the physicists' collective brainpower is propelling Schumacher forward. It's as if they're saying, "We have the formula (pun intended) for speed!" In our amusement and astonishment, we couldn't help but make a Schumacher-related dad joke or two. Much like Schumacher's driving, this correlation is not something we can sweep under the rug. We propose that future research explores potential causal factors, such as whether Schumacher's car secretly had a quantum physics-themed paint job, or if the physicists were secretly sneaking in "speed boost" equations into their research papers.

ChatGPT:

California, physicists, Formula One, Michael Schumacher, correlation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wikipedia, quantum mechanics, gravity-defying maneuvers, race performance, quantum leap, brainpower, speed boost, causal factors

*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

The number of physicists in California
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of physicists in California
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of physicists in California

Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking
Detailed data title: Michael Schumacher's Formula One Rankings
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking

Correlation r = 0.9708784 (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 = 0.9426049 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of physicists in California) over the 10 years from 2003 through 2012.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 3.04E-6.^Show 0.0000030379506664369680000000
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 0.97 in 0.000304% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 329,169 random variables^Note You don't actually need 329 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 9 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 9 because we have two variables measured over a period of 10 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.

[ 0.88, 0.99 ] 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.

	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
The number of physicists in California (Physicists)	1650	1830	2170	1800	1700	2010	1880	2890	3030	3730
Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking (Position)	1	1	3	2	0	0	0	9	8	13

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.
Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. ^Note Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.

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([1650,1830,2170,1800,1700,2010,1880,2890,3030,3730,])
array_2 = np.array([1,1,3,2,0,0,0,9,8,13,])
array_1_name = "The number of physicists in California"
array_2_name = "Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking"

# 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 The number of physicists in California
Line chart for only Michael Schumacher's Formula One Ranking
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Physics Folks and Schumacher's Strokes: The Link Between California Physicists and Formula One Rankings

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

You're a rater extraordinaire!

Correlation ID: 3705 · Black Variable ID: 5367 · Red Variable ID: 104


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