435: Purity

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Transcript: transcript was not complete - now it is.)
m (Transcript)
Line 25: Line 25:
[The mathematician stands much further to the right than any other field. Except the lest pure sociologist they all say something to the less pure person on their left:]
[The mathematician stands much further to the right than any other field. Except the least pure sociologist they all say something adressed to the less pure person(s) on their left:]
:Psychologist: Sociology is just applied psychology.
:Psychologist: Sociology is just applied psychology.
:Biologist: Psychology is just applied biology.
:Biologist: Psychology is just applied biology.

Revision as of 05:37, 10 June 2014

On the other hand, physicists like to say physics is to math as sex is to masturbation.
Title text: On the other hand, physicists like to say physics is to math as sex is to masturbation.


Mathematics is the abstract study of topics encompassing quantity, structure, space, change, and others. Physics is a natural science that involves the study of matter and its motion through space and time, along with related concepts such as energy and force. They do this using mathematics. Chemistry is the science of matter, especially its chemical reactions, but also its composition, structure and properties. That is, they study a subset of physics, using a subset of physics. Biology is the subset of chemistry that is concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, distribution, and taxonomy. Psychology is the study of mental functions and behaviors, why living things do what they do individually, which makes it a subset of Biology. Sociology is the study of society, or, the study of groups of people and their interactions, which sounds an awful lot like taking the skills of psychology and applying them.

Taking this logic to the extreme, one can say that a field is 'more pure', and thus matters more, than the fields derived from it. This is a topic often used in jokes between scientists of various fields as to who is more important. The physicist, of which everyone else's work is based upon, feels that he is at the top... but is ultimately upstaged by the mathematician, whose field is so pure that ultimately everything else could be seen as derived from it. After all, physics could not exist without math, thus ultimately everything can be expressed as a mathematical equation. Thus, the mathematician snobbishly says that she didn't even see any of the other fields standing so far over to the left on the graph. Alternatively they are not snobby - they are just so far detached from the real world - that they do not even understand that there could be a comparison between them and other fields. That is if they even know about these other fields!

The title text points out math is all just in your head, only for your own pleasure. Physics involves interactions with other objects. This leads to a comparison between sex (physics) and masturbation (mathematics), implying that physics is the real joy in the world.


Fields arranged by purity
[An arrow is shown below this - pointing right. Below this is the text:]
More pure
[Six people are shown representing six scientific fields. They stand on a scale of purity with the left end representing less purity and the right representing more purity. They appear in this order as written under each person on their position in the scale:]

[The mathematician stands much further to the right than any other field. Except the least pure sociologist they all say something adressed to the less pure person(s) on their left:]

Psychologist: Sociology is just applied psychology.
Biologist: Psychology is just applied biology.
Chemist: Biology is just applied chemistry
Physicist: Which is just applied physics. It's nice to be on top.
Mathematician: Oh, hey, I didn't see you guys all the way over there.

comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!


See Comte's hierarchy of the sciences from his law of three stages: Mathematics; Astronomy; Physics; Chemistry; Biology; Psychology; Sociology. -- 07:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

In addition to Comte, Randall's tweaking P.W. Anderson's 1972 article "More Is Different." Anderson gives a similar list and then says "But this hierarchy does not imply that science X is "just applied Y*" 22:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Shame it leaves out Engineering running parellel to all of them - maybe Engineering is just too busy getting shit done? -- (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

- What can we learn from this? - Actually as an Engineer I have a different view point to We are implementers of original ideas and a few of us are lucky to be original idea generators. As a successful full time Engineer I still find time to be a philosopher and aspiring teacher (who simply didn't want to be poor, which is hard to do when specializing in the other two professions). How ever I do keep asking myself often who wrote the laws that mathematicians and theoretical scientists keep re-discovering for us... - E-inspired (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

"More is Different", written by Nobel laureate P.W. Anderson, is an insightful critique of constructivism. Quote:

But this hierarchy does not imply that science X is "just applied Y." At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one.

Allenz (talk) 02:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

This one resonated around the Internet quite a bit more than average, and deservedly so. I'd think it'd be almost as far-reaching as the grownups one. I did wonder, after I saw this, how one would take into account things like linguistics, logic, and philosophy. Then I read Gödel, Escher, Bach and returned to normal. --Quicksilver (talk) 03:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Could one argue that Mathematics is applied Philosophy? NikoNarf (talk) 15:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Physics and mathematics

Physics, chemistry, biology, earth science,... are science on how things work. Mathematics and philosophy are science on how things can be predicted to work. 10:08, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

A friend of mine compared the math-physics relationship to linguist-regular person. A linguist researches all the little details in a language that a normal person merely uses in his everyday life without giving the language itself much thought. 08:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Before we get into an edit war here, I'd just like to say that "physics is the real joy in the world" would make absolutely no sense to me if I was not a native English speaker or I simply wasn't getting the comic's point in the first place. Not only does it have shades of grammatical incorrectness, it does absolutely nothing to actually explain how mathematics and physics can be compared to sex and masturbation. Thus I've changed the title text around to a compromise between my edit and what it was before. I hope this is more acceptable. Jetman123 (talk) 13:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm still not happy with the title text explain:
  • The explain implies that masturbation "is all just in your head" and not "involves interactions with real objects". Isn't a vagina/penis also a real object?
My last edit on this wasn't perfect as well, so it still needs an enhancement. The joke is more like this: Math/maturbation gives only satisfaction to the subject acting on this — Physics/sex are related to the real world (applied science/babies). And this is surely exaggerated by Randall because physics couldn't exist without mathematics — those faculties just joking about each other. --Dgbrt (talk) 20:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Some experts say the universe is a computer. Some other experts say all computers can be hacked. If both groups are right, then it follows that physics is one stack-overflow exploit away from being reduced to applied computer science. Promethean (talk) 23:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

From: The psychology of the pure mathematician

  • "On the other hand, physicists like to say physics is to math as sex is to masturbation."
  • Are physicists born with particles- or are they implanted because they are born without balls?
  • Would a mathematician have much better analogies than orgasms?

I wouldn't know.

  • Math is to physics as,
  • drugs are to prostitutes,
  • green eggs are to ham,
  • quod erat demonstrandum is to cogito ergo sum,
  • masterbating is to shakespearing,
  • coffee is to sugar,
  • Spock is to House,
  • category theory is to Kama Sutra,
  • Cicero is to Caesar.

Sorry physics, but it seems to me that your particle accelerators are gluttonously huge scientifically unnecessary and totally useless particle-crunchers, functionally comparable to fastest-known super-computer designs for discovering new large prime numbers. I wonder if physicists are actually the heaviest consumers of funding that would otherwise be available to support mathematicians, who are obviously the lightest consumers of research funding and also the most productive of new discoveries. Mathematicians can actually tell the difference between an arbitrary mathematical information computational process, and an orgy of man-boy physicists playing with their tiny balls in a spaceship-submarine with a warp-core that could give anyone an involuntary geek-gasm easily shrinking physics to the size of sex. QED.

Thanks for the joke, any offense taken it was not my intention to return. I just felt the need to point out that, although I agree that physics is a respectable second-best, sexy is a long way from first.

Nafindix 06:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Random side note: One could argue that mathematics is applied philosophy (if we take philosophy as a way to create an understanding of the world), and that philosophy (as a product of human societies) is applied sociology. It's a weak argument, but the circular-ness is appealing. 15:41, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Equivocation!--Troy0 (talk) 06:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Last night, I passed around my phone in a discussion group, and it showed the philosopher both on the left, and again WAY OVER on the right, with a "Whoa!" This morning, it is back to how it is presented above. Randall, are you messing with me? Knechod (talk) 17:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Personal tools


It seems you are using noscript, which is stopping our project wonderful ads from working. Explain xkcd uses ads to pay for bandwidth, and we manually approve all our advertisers, and our ads are restricted to unobtrusive images and slow animated GIFs. If you found this site helpful, please consider whitelisting us.

Want to advertise with us, or donate to us with Paypal?