It’s actually frightening all the information coming out recently about how science is done these days. A recent study found that most studies published in, I think, a psychology journal were totally un-repeatable. Another study showed that if you give different teams of scientists the same data set, they will come up with widely varying conclusions.
It’s not just lately, this has been going on for some time. Cyclamates were banned in the US and UK based on a single study of a statistically too small group of rats in 1969. Subsequent studies were unable to replicate the results of the original flawed study and cyclamates were later approved for use in some 60 countries (but remain banned in the US).
What you have to remember is that psychology is an incredibly young science. A lot of stuff is going to be garbage, because there’s just not a huge amount of data to work with. This doesn’t extrapolate to all fields of science–most of what’s published in, say, geology is almost certainly good. And remember, while folks will fund cutting-edge research NO ONE funds replications unless required by law. Almost all replications are really explorations of implications of the original study; they tweak it somehow to get funding.
Beer causes philosophy when used in large quantities.
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out-consume
Schopenhauer and Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.
There’s nothing Nietzsche couldn’t teach ya’
‘Bout the raising of the wrist.
SOCRATES, HIMSELF, WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED…
I’ll have to make a pot of coffee and soak my toes. It’s going to take a long straw to reach the soak pan for me to have my morning jolts of coffee but in the interests of science…
This is where you go “…but if you become my patron on Patreon, you can order a hi-res version of any comic each month”, you terribly ineffectual salesperson.
Speaking of which, this month I’ll have the above comic, as soon as I remember how to work Patreon chat, Adam.
Gah! You’re right. I’m so used to thinking of copies as physical prints. But yes, if you become a Patreon for $3.00 or more, once per month you can request a high res digital copy of a particular strip.
Thanks, Rat!
This is truer than you think. A well known (but frequently incorrectly attributed) quote goes: “A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems”.
It’s no secret in the hard sciences that coffee is a sacred nectar. This blog by an actual physicist details several legitimate experiments dedicated to proving how coffee (and in one case, three coffees and a cocktail) make life better: http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-scientific-ways-coffee-gives-you-super-powers/
I think you meant “addictions”, but given that I’ve posted a quote about coffee and math being so tightly linked, I want to believe you seriously meant that as a warning that coffee is a gateway drug to mathematics.
It might be. I was going to make a counter argument about how I am a mathematician and I hate coffee but then realised a counter example doesn’t prove anything here. I believe we need an in-depth study to come to any conclusions….. as I was typing this my statistics friend told me he once did a study on coffee usage in universities and found that math, science and engineer majors drank significantly more coffee than their arts equivalents. So yeah, coffee may cause you to do additions.
Fun fact: Scientists and engineers drink more coffee than any other professions. More than doctors, more than lawyers, more than any third-shift workers. I’m siding with the Bug on this one.
Pretty sure this happens in science all the time.
I always knew I was a scientist.
And that’s why I went into the humanities. I just don’t like coffee. It’s not the worst reason I suppose.
“Lack of coffee lowers life ambitions.”
Huh.
“A mathematician is a tool for turning coffee into theorems.”
Damn you for beating me to that.
Me too. Also I have suspicion that those claims are sponsored. Sadly many research are sponsored by wrong side nowadays.
It’s actually frightening all the information coming out recently about how science is done these days. A recent study found that most studies published in, I think, a psychology journal were totally un-repeatable. Another study showed that if you give different teams of scientists the same data set, they will come up with widely varying conclusions.
That is why most fields has a simple rule of thumb: nothing is proven until the third group reproducing the experiment verifies the claim.
But yeah, in these days headlines are all about “published first” instead of “stuff actually verified” :/
It’s not just lately, this has been going on for some time. Cyclamates were banned in the US and UK based on a single study of a statistically too small group of rats in 1969. Subsequent studies were unable to replicate the results of the original flawed study and cyclamates were later approved for use in some 60 countries (but remain banned in the US).
What you have to remember is that psychology is an incredibly young science. A lot of stuff is going to be garbage, because there’s just not a huge amount of data to work with. This doesn’t extrapolate to all fields of science–most of what’s published in, say, geology is almost certainly good. And remember, while folks will fund cutting-edge research NO ONE funds replications unless required by law. Almost all replications are really explorations of implications of the original study; they tweak it somehow to get funding.
How do you think they discovered water on Mars? Can’t make an espresso without H2O.
And tea consists mostly of di-hydrogen monoxide; deadly stuff if misused. But I can use it responsibly, so I drink tea instead of coffee.
Dihydrogen monoxide can strip paint off a deck*.
*if you use the right equipment.
Doesn’t beer have a lot of health benefits too? I bet they came to the same conclusions in the same way…
Someone asked an answer column how long a person could live solely on beer, since it’s made from grain. Answer: “Well, I’m 42…”
Beer causes philosophy when used in large quantities.
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out-consume
Schopenhauer and Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.
There’s nothing Nietzsche couldn’t teach ya’
‘Bout the raising of the wrist.
SOCRATES, HIMSELF, WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED…
I’ll have to make a pot of coffee and soak my toes. It’s going to take a long straw to reach the soak pan for me to have my morning jolts of coffee but in the interests of science…
Hey I know the original is already sold, but is it possible to buy a copy?
Thanks for your interest! Unfortunately, no. I don’t offer copies at this time. Maybe some day in the future I will.
This is where you go “…but if you become my patron on Patreon, you can order a hi-res version of any comic each month”, you terribly ineffectual salesperson.
Speaking of which, this month I’ll have the above comic, as soon as I remember how to work Patreon chat, Adam.
Gah! You’re right. I’m so used to thinking of copies as physical prints. But yes, if you become a Patreon for $3.00 or more, once per month you can request a high res digital copy of a particular strip.
Thanks, Rat!
IV espresso. Now I’ll be up all day and night thinking about that one. 8-D
Coffee enemas are a real thing. Now you’ll never sleep again*.
*From the thinking about it. Not from rectal Joe.
It can be both, you know.
This is truer than you think. A well known (but frequently incorrectly attributed) quote goes: “A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems”.
It’s no secret in the hard sciences that coffee is a sacred nectar. This blog by an actual physicist details several legitimate experiments dedicated to proving how coffee (and in one case, three coffees and a cocktail) make life better: http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-scientific-ways-coffee-gives-you-super-powers/
Except coffee lowers your metabolism and causes additions so not so great.
I think you meant “addictions”, but given that I’ve posted a quote about coffee and math being so tightly linked, I want to believe you seriously meant that as a warning that coffee is a gateway drug to mathematics.
It might be. I was going to make a counter argument about how I am a mathematician and I hate coffee but then realised a counter example doesn’t prove anything here. I believe we need an in-depth study to come to any conclusions….. as I was typing this my statistics friend told me he once did a study on coffee usage in universities and found that math, science and engineer majors drank significantly more coffee than their arts equivalents. So yeah, coffee may cause you to do additions.
Fun fact: Scientists and engineers drink more coffee than any other professions. More than doctors, more than lawyers, more than any third-shift workers. I’m siding with the Bug on this one.
As a scientist, I can confirm this. I mean, I can confirm this when I don’t have the caffeine jitters too bad to type.
(Note to self) Adam knows too much. Adam must be “taken care of”
Fluffy pillow and comfy chair … stat
i’m gonna admit that “bug martini” still throws me off. I understand why you did it, but I miss “bug”
Well, I miss the adventures of the Weesh comic strip characters.
Wasn’t there some Hungarian Mathematician who liked his coffee and liked his coke as well? Died a few years back?
Erdos… Thanks, Google. Liked his speed.
Oh yeah. That guy.
What’s your Erdos number?
Mine is a 6 (I think).
If nothing else, bug attracts an erudite audience, though in the spirit of the discussion, we may or may not need a study on that.