[j2kun]

This article has no references to back up its claims, some of which seem like a stretch without further evidence (e.g., "The Cheshire Cat is a property without a carrier" being a critique of group theory). Are there references that back these claims up?

[standardly]

I believe it's because this is random AI garbage. I swear ChatGPT can be used to justify anything. The "jokes" are nonsensical and unfunny, even for early-19th-century Oxford professor inside jokes...

I'm surprised to see, on HN of all places, so many people taking the AI bait so often. Seems like more than half of blog posts and articles posted here are AI generated, but people skip reading the content and just go straight to the comments to discuss the title out of context.

[eesmith]

Several others have mentioned Martin Gardner's book "Annotated Alice". It has a section on the Cheshire cat's grin, at https://archive.org/details/agt-annotated-alice-5807b6/page/...

> "Grin like a Cheshire cat" was a common phrase in Carroll's day. Its origin is not known. The two leading theories are: (1) A sign painter in Cheshire (the county, by the way, where Carroll was born) painted grinning lions on the signboards of inns in the area (see Notes and Queries, No. 130, April 24, 1852, page 402); (2) Cheshire cheeses were at one time molded in the shape of a grinning cat (see Notes and Queries, No. 55, Nov. 16, 1850, page 412). "This has a peculiar Carrollian appeal," writes Dr. Phyllis Greenaere in her psychoanalytic study of Carroll, "as it provokes the fantasy that the cheesy cat may eat the rat that would eat the cheese." The Cheshire Cat is not in the original manuscript, Alice's Adventures Under Ground.

It continues with a full page on the topic, none of which are anything to do with math jokes.

[sdthjbvuiiijbb]

Not even the first time I've seen random AI garbage from this domain on HN. I share your sense of despair.

[ian_j_butler]

He did actually work with permutations and cycles in voting ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgson's_method ) but it's combinatorial and not very group'y. Agree with comments that this is AI generated and that the highlighted stuff isn't necessarily interesting, deep, or correct.

As for the cat's smile, analytic philosophy substance/property stuff goes back to Leibniz if not Aristotle. Dodgeson basically predates much of Russel's career, but he could have been an influence on his idea of "bundles" and he definitely influenced Quine. He wrote a few textbooks if you want to dig into his research interests but IIRC it's more along the lines of Boole and DeMorgan, even if fictional fun is arguably anticipating the next wave. I linked the haddock's eyes elsewhere in thread.. good fun but also some rich implications. Since he's preoccupied with self-reference you could argue it anticipates Godel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinctio...

[AnotherGoodName]

A lot of these are very reminiscent of asking ai to find references to a subject. You end up with very tenuous links that take multiple steps to get there and i’m never convinced that the author really did intend that meaning.

Of course this could also be traditional literary analysis. It’s hard to tell.

[xandrius]

Exactly, even having a father in the 1800s reading this to their kid and instantly getting that it's a base 4 joke is such a stretch that the article lost me right there. Even after knowing what it is, it's pretty obscure to spot.