connections chart[]
we used to have a really cool if somewhat incomplete chart of connections, but i can't find it :(
would make a nice addition to the article as a converse. --kaini. 21:13, 23 October 2006 (PDT)
Maybe thinking of this? --PandoraX 21:33, 23 October 2006 (PDT) 
whilst not deserving of a link in the article...[]
the sheer fact that such a thing as an Erdős–Bacon number exists restores my faith in the world a little bit... damn, i love silly academia. --kaini. 22:09, 23 October 2006 (PDT)
External links[]
- External links to examples of Apophenia elsewhere would be very illuminating, for example blog entries (not misfit, as he is tongue in cheek) and especially discussion threads at fan forums. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯ Talk 11:56, 24 January 2007 (PST)
Star Wars Example[]
I noticed that under the "In Popular Television" section under "Examples outside of Lost" it uses the following example: "Star Wars fandom has catalogued and given a back story to every single background character in the Cantina Scene in Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. I'm guesing that this statement refers to the book, Tales From the Mos Eisley Cantina, an anthology of short stories that gives background to the characters seen in the Cantina scene. If it is referring to that, then I don't think that qualifies as a valid example. Unless I'm misunderstanding this article, the subject is about theories that are made up by fans who pay too much attention to things that are clearly coincidence. This is not the case with Tales From the Mos Eisley Cantina, as each Star Wars book, comic book, video game, etc. is published with authorization of Lucasfilm. In fact George Lucas himself has even been involved in thinking up some of the events that take place within the Star Wars novels (e.g.: Chewbacca's death in Star Wars The New Jedi Order: Vector Prime). So I don't think this really qualifies as a valid example of a fan-made theory. Nahald 23:59, 11 February 2007 (PST)
This article is in need of more examples[]
There were so many really crazy theories that were based on nothing more than wishful thinking. Does anyone remember any paticularly cringeworthy examples?--Nevermore 14:43, 25 May 2008 (PDT)
- For the numbers I liked "0 degrees Celius is the same as 273 Kelvin. 273/(23 - 16) = (23 + 16)" from Kelvin Joe Inman. There are probably some likely candidates of other wishful thinking in the cultural and biblical references sections of Jacob at the moment.--TechNic|talk|conts 16:04, 25 May 2008 (PDT)
Forced Connections[]
I wanted to add another example in there but i'm not sure it really fits under this category (maybe that doesnt even belong in apophenia ?). Basically whenever a new character is introduced, there's always a great number of crackpot theories that this person is someone else in a different timeline. Best example i can think of is Annie. As soon as she was introduced, a great numbers of theories appeared regarding her identity in the present timeline, ranging from kate to mrs hawkings with almost every female characters in the show listed in between. Is that an apophenia, when people automatically assume that when someone is introduced this person is also someone else ? does it fall under forced connection (some of them were loosely based on physical appearence but a whole bunch of them were just plain down unfounded) ? FabC 12:06, 26 May 2008 (PDT)
- Hmm. I think it might fall under "Forced Connections". Maybe point out that it is a special sub-variant of this problem. However, the problem is that the standard "forced connection" can be proven wrong by pointing out that two different actors played the roles (and even that isn't always an indication, see Carole Littleton), whereas your case has no immediate way of disproving it.--Nevermore 12:12, 26 May 2008 (PDT)
Season 5... oh the fun.[]
The latest one I've stumbled across: Locke's gunshot wound from "Because You Left" is somehow, through some time-travel "phantom pain" mumbo jumbo, the cause for Locke's legs temporarily failing in "Deus Ex Machina".
Nevermind that Locke's problems in "Deus Ex Machina" started when he and Boone tried to use the trebuchet to open the hatch, and a splinter poked Locke's leg, but Locke didn't even feel it. Then he used a safety pin and a purning stick to test his legs, resulting in the discovery that he had lost the feeling in his legs. And then, on the way to the Beechcraft, Locke's legs (both of them, even) stopped working altogether. How those symptoms are supposed to relate to a gunshot wound in one leg is beyond me.
I'm not sure whether this should belong under "theory takes priority over the show" of "unobservant fans", though.--Nevermore 00:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Are people really claiming to see a face in a tree in Whatever Happened, Happened? I didn't know that some fans are still digging this far deep into the show. While it does have a lot of Easter eggs, it's ridiculous to make plot points out of production errors or freaks of nature.--Linus2342 15:59, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Star Trek Reference[]
The method behind the convention of stardates is not something that has been made up by fan speculation. While stardates were randomly chosen, the explanations created to explain why stardates might occasionally decrease from one episode to the next, etc, were put forward by Rodenberry himself.
Secret of the Golden Pontiac[]
It was mentioned on the Podcast on 4/4. Made me laugh, then saw this was the article of the week. Now, what's the pattern here? --Crazy Bearded Jack 01:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
What is this paragraph saying?[]
I've moved the following block here for now:
Its large cast of main and secondary characters ts t features a large number of central characters (and many other recurring secondary characters) is a major factor in this; if you increase the number of protagonists, it follows that the number of connections between characters can increase at an exponential rate in comparison. One of the themes acknowledged by the writers, in fact, is about the serendipitous nature of improbable meetings, i.e., the "6 degrees effect".
What exactly does it mean? Is it proposing that the large cast makes connections coincidental, inevitable? Because that's simply untrue. It's true in real life, but the writers plan every character interaction. If Sawyer bumps into Christian's car, it's not because the producers through fifty extras in the scene and one happened to be Josh Holloway. No - they intended the connection. Fans can note hundreds of imaginary patterns, but "oh my! Sam Austen and Kelvin were in the army together" isn't apophenia. Conclusions you draw based on that may be erroneous, but the observation itself isn't apophenia. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 12:08, September 24, 2010 (UTC)