In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter
that is undetectable by its emitted electromagnetic radiation, but whose
presence can be inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter. According
to present observations of structures larger than galaxies, as well as Big Bang
cosmology, dark matter and dark energy could account for the vast majority of
the mass in the observable universe.
--Wikipedia
An interdisciplinary team
of scientists and comedians have concluded that there is an enormous
discrepancy between the amount of observed humor in the world, and the amount
of humor predicted by fundamental physical laws and statistical
principles. The team’s findings, which
resulted from a five-year research program sponsored by the US National Science
Foundation, means that perhaps 95% of the world’s humor cannot yet be measured
or observed by science. “Our calculations
and models now prove that this humor exists in the universe. Our basic theories
of matter, energy, and probabilities tell us that it is out there,” explained
Professor Rachel Overtones, the University of Kansas theoretical physicist who
led the project. “Why, then, don’t we
see it around us? That will be a subject
for further research.”
Evidence for the missing
humor, termed “dark humor” by the research team, is apparently all around
us. During the initial phase of the
project, the team confirmed that the number of cream pies and banana peels in
the world predicted a far greater amount of humor than scientists could
observe. “The simple physics was
clear: so much viscous mass, so much
potential energy, so little humor,” explained Professor Overtones.
At first the scientists
believed that the missing humor would turn up in other places, for example in
association with new breeds of dogs and rodents. Similarly, a radical decline in the amount of
humor related to ethnic groups and disabled people, largely reflecting shifting
cultural norms, was thought by some in the field to be a contributor to the
humor deficit.
But further research
results proved that the discrepancy was far too large to be explained by such
transient factors. According to Dr. Sven
Galley, a cognitive scientist on the team, “Our collaboration with comedians
was the key to developing general algorithms for situations, word combinations,
and phenomena that were humorous. From
there, and with the benefit of our massively parallel supercomputing facility,
we used a brute force approach.” The
scientists applied the algorithms to over 10 billion randomly sampled written
and graphic documents on the internet. “We were stunned to find that the
predicted amount of humor always exceeded that which we could detect by at least
two orders of magnitude,” said Professor Overtones. An excess of two orders of magnitude means
there was 100 times more predicted humor than actual humor. “This result held
up across every domain that we tested:
farm animals and travelling salesmen, lawyers, glands and organs,
excreta and eructations, zero gravity situations, priests and rabbis, Scottish
charities, Bulgarian telephones, and so on.
The only area where we managed to detect more than a 100-to-1 ratio of
dark humor to actual humor was sexual dysfunction, but when we normalized this
for aging populations, that effect completely disappeared.”
Not all scientists are
convinced by the results. Jerome Horwitz, a New York University social
scientist who studies humor and funniness in otherwise tragic circumstances,
acknowledged that the research protocol was impressive and the results were
suggestive. “This was a well conceived
program, patiently carried out by capable scientists. Yet their models could not fully discount
other explanations, for example that today’s dominant culture is not as funny
as cultures in other times and places.
Such contingencies cannot be predicted from physical first principles or
statistical laws.”
But researchers on the
team brushed aside such criticism. “Of course we are aware of cultural
contamination,” countered Dr. Galley.
“But we applied a very conservative filter to our algorithm to eliminate
biases, using comedians from multiple cultures, and also using totally unfunny
people from one culture to test humor in other cultures. And besides, cultural effects cut both
ways—what’s funny to a Jew in a bar with a tiny man in his pocket may be dead
serious to an Arab playing golf in a thunderstorm. And vice versa.”
Scientists emphasized
that the findings should not concern people. “This is nothing to be depressed
about. Humans have obviously evolved to
detect only the tiniest proportion of the humor that surrounds us,” said Professor
Overtones. “It’s like our vision. People can only detect a tiny proportion of
the electromagnetic spectrum—that was sufficient for us to survive and thrive
into modern times. Science gradually
revealed the rest of the spectrum, from gamma rays to microwave radiation.”
By revealing the
non-visible spectrum, scientific discoveries led to technological innovations
that have improved people’s ability to look more deeply into nature, and to
control invisible natural phenomena for human benefit—using everything from
radios to x-ray machines. “In the same way,” explained Overtones, “the
discovery of dark humor tells us that there is an undetected domain of humorous
phenomena in the universe waiting to be discovered, understood, and harnessed
for the well-being of humankind. With
additional research funding, we will step up our efforts to locate this missing
jocularity.”
When asked whether her
team would seek intellectual property protection to cover any newly discovered
humor, Dr. Overtones paraphrased the sentiments of her scientific hero, Dr.
Jonas Salk, inventor of the polio vaccine.
“There is no patent. Could you
patent the pun?”
