It was quite the paradox!

  • rah
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Don’t get it. Suspect it doesn’t actually make sense.

    • Amanduh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      14 hours ago

      This joke combines the concepts associated with Pavlov and Schrödinger, two famous scientists, creating a clever wordplay that also references their respective experiments.

      1. Pavlov: Known for his classical conditioning experiment with dogs. He rang a bell before feeding dogs, conditioning them to salivate whenever they heard the bell.

      2. Schrödinger: Famous for the thought experiment Schrödinger’s Cat, where a cat in a box is simultaneously alive and dead until observed. This illustrates a paradox in quantum mechanics about the nature of superposition.

      The Joke:

      When Pavlov and Schrödinger “bumped into each other,” two things happen at once, creating the humor:

      Pavlov’s reaction: If something unexpected happens (like bumping into someone), the event might “trigger” a conditioned response — such as Pavlov salivating because he’s used to the bell.

      Schrödinger’s paradox: The joke suggests that before observation, they are both aware and unaware of bumping into each other, akin to Schrödinger’s cat being alive and dead.

      The Punchline: “It was quite the paradox!”

      The joke itself is a paradox because it humorously combines Pavlov’s predictable conditioning with Schrödinger’s uncertainty, two contradictory ideas.

      The wordplay is clever because “paradox” not only describes Schrödinger’s cat but also the confusing situation of this fictional encounter.

      • rah
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Uhh… this analysis makes no sense at all. And now OP has admitted that the joke doesn’t make sense and doesn’t work. Still, just for edification:

        Pavlov’s reaction: If something unexpected happens (like bumping into someone), the event might “trigger” a conditioned response — such as Pavlov salivating because he’s used to the bell.

        There was no conditioned response.

        The wordplay is clever because “paradox” not only describes Schrödinger’s cat but also the confusing situation of this fictional encounter.

        There was no confusion.

          • rah
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            You didn’t help me, you wasted my time. Pro-tip: be quiet.

      • rah
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        What’s the idea?

          • rah
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            Obviously. But what about them?

            • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              18 hours ago

              That’s my interpretation of what they were going for. If there’s any deeper meaning behind it, I don’t know it.

              • rah
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 hours ago

                That’s my interpretation of what they were going for.

                I’m asking what the joke is. That’s the focus here. Because it’s presented as a joke. Even though it appears not to be. If you get it, please explain it.

                • Amanduh@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  Yeah i think it has something to do with a cat and dog

                • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  18 hours ago

                  This is why I don’t think it’s presented well, because that’s the only thing I get from it as well.

    • Theo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      It both makes sense and doesn’t at the same time but eventually the punchline might ring a bell.

      • rah
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        Being mysterious doesn’t help me I’m afraid. Still don’t get it. The punchline doesn’t make sense and doesn’t ring a bell.

        The fact that you haven’t just explained the joke makes me think you can’t because it doesn’t work as a joke. Right?

        • Theo@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          They are doctors who have paradoxical theories (pair of docs) but after some research Pavlov’s theory of conditioning is not a paradox so the site I ripped this joke off of may have used the wrong doctor.

      • papalonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Pavlov’s dogs and Schrodinger’s cat?

        There’s something there, I think, but it doesn’t land as is.

        I sat on it for a while and came up with this:

        Pavlov and Schrodinger were flying together to a Thinker’s Convention. Their plane lost power and, in effort to make a safe landing, the pilot dumped their cargo.

        For citizens below, it was raining cats and dogs.