I have found what i believe to be the combination of the subtlest and funniest joke ever included in any tv show ever.
First lets define 2 classes
P - The class of polynomially solvable problems, P contains all sets in which membership may be decided by an algorithm whose running time is bounded by a polynomial.
NP - The class of nondeterministic polynomially acceptable problems, NP, contains all sets in which membership can be verified in polynomial time.
Very simple explanation (I think its right!)
P - A program that will find a solution to a problem
NP - A program that will find if a solution you offer it works.
There is literally *millions* of dollars on the line if anyone can prove or disprove that P = NP.
This is a huge problem that Quantum Physicists and Complex Mathematicians and people all over the world can NOT solve and aren't sure it will ever be solved. 

In Futurama Ep210 - Put Your Head on my Shoulder, when Fry's head is on Amy's body and they're in the closet and he is breaking up with her.  On the shelves are two books, one labelled P and the other labelled NP.
supposedly LISTING the members of the two classes P and NP individually!
Now HOW many people in the WHOLE WORLD would even get that, and then how many of THOSE people watch Futurama?  And someone had to THINK of that and put it IN THE EPISODE!
I didn't learn about this til my 4th year of a University Computer Science Degree.
This is a bigger mathematical joke than the 1729 "conspiracy/joke" that is written about on this forum.
If anyone has any thoughts on this or just wants to tell me i'm nuts, please reply!
 

I do believe that is one of the subtlest jokes I've heard of in this show this far.

Welcome to PEEL

OMG that 's almost as nerdy as this nerd fight.

 

Originally posted by BarneyBurnham:
I'm still confused. What is it again? They have said before that the Futurama staff is a bunch of brain-iacs.

Is it mentiomed on the commentary? I haven't watched that one yet and I can't be arsed to go and look now.

I heard something on the season 2 DVD commentaries about some of the staff having high degrees. I can't recall exactly what it was.
 

They mention a subtle/dirty one in "Why Must I Be A Crustacean In Love?" (at the gym) but I still don't get it...

I know which one. Where Fry wants to lend his arm to Zoidberg, so he could get rid of his male jelly. 

3 of the writers have math degrees -- David Cohen, Ken Keeler, and someone else.  I know at least Ken Keeler has a doctorate in it, Cohen studied Physics and Computers I believe.

The subtle, dirty joke in the gym was a woman "lifting" weights with the Kegaliser.

I think they made mention of this during the S2 commentaries regarding the P and NP symbols in the background. I do not think they explained the joke but rather that there are a few people out there who would get it. In a way it is kind of like that Quantom Leke joke from Mother's Day - sort of at least. OK, maybe not.
As far as being the subtlest, unfortunately we will probably never know what the most subtle joke is in Futurama as nobody would get it in the first place. And out of the small number of people who get it how many would be involved in a board like this? The good news is that they usually point stuff like this out on the commentaries and so somebody can go research it to figure it out.
RM

 

Originally posted by McGrady:
The subtle, dirty joke in the gym was a woman "lifting" weights with the Kegaliser.

Okay, I see now. I couldn't make out the word on the machine, even with the freeze-frame.

I don´t know if it is completely true, but I have found that:

"In second half 2000 was proved

Theorem: The class of NP-complete problems is coincides with the class P.

   The proof of this theorem, whose brief formulation is NP=P, is contained in the book

Positionality principle for notation and calculation the functions
Volume One"

(found in http://www.tarusa.ru/~mit/ENG/eng.html )

 

Originally posted by JDHannan:
If anyone has any thoughts on this or just wants to tell me i'm nuts, please reply!

...your nuts!

Actually, "caca" is a pretty commonly used euphemism for feces. I'm surprised you never heard it.

WOW. That is brilliant.

isn't 'caca' a word meaning shit in Italian, as well?

In Space pilot 3000 the floating Holo-screen
in Leela's office "SQUEAKS" as if on pivots, even though it's hovering in mid air. I thought this was pretty cool.
But it's not the only example of future technology making low-tech cartoon noises.
can anyone think of any?

 

Originally posted by Carbito:
 ...your nuts!

His nuts are what? Tasty? Showing?

I think that computer has an invisible pole attached to the screen. And it is possible, just look at this guy!

Huh?

[Farnsworth]Focus![/Farnsworth]

Aussie, do you plan to make sense one day?

Oh, that was a joke as well? D'oh. 

And welcome to PEEL, Mercapto
 

Yay! It's not only the science majors who are twisted! It's just that working with chemistry (and hazardous chemicals) 50 hours a week tends to warp one's mind (my username's a good example) 

Oh, and thanks for the welcome, Gocad!

well, how about if someone explain the Schrodinger joke if so many people get it?

Out of all the shows on TV, can you think of one where people are more likely to enjoy jokes about computational mathematics or quantum physics than Futurama?

Enterprise does not count--Star Trek fans get the references, think they're unintentional mistakes, and complain.

I think that Cohen and friends can assume that a decent percentage of their audience has read a few pop science books--which means that they'll know who Stephen Hawking is, and the name "Schroedinger's Cat" will at least sound vaguely familiar.

The P/NP joke is even geekier--and in fact, it's subtler than you think. It's been proven that any proof of P<>NP will require either a complete list of at least one set, or an algorithm that can generate that list in countable time.

That's why there are books listing all of P and NP.

However, the proof is pretty recent. So, unless you just got out of college, or work in a closely related field, the chances that you'd know this are miniscule.

As for why those books would be buried in a closet, they're probably not important. It's highly possible that quantum computers will be able to solve non-polynomial problems in polynomial time. And we should have them in the near future.

So, by the time we prove that P<>NP, it won't matter anyway, other than as a mathematical curiosity.

I'm sure this all sounds like just a mathematical curiosity anyway, but let me try to explain why it's not, giving one example:

Let's say you're sending your credit card to a website over an SSL connection, using a 128-bit key.

If P<>NP, that transaction is safe, it may take 2^128 steps to crack it (about 1 with 42 zeroes after it, a number so big we don't have a word for it); the NSA could do it if they tied up a good fraction of their computers for a few months.

If P=NP, it may take only 128^2 steps (about 16000); a kid with a Commodore 64 could do it while making a sandwich.

By the way, to the best of my knowledge, the Russian proof that Bender22 referenced is widely considered as flawed, the problem is still considered unsolved.

Most mathematicians and computer scientists believe that P<>NP, and that eventually we'll probably prove it, but the proof will probably be something as ugly as the four-color theorem's proof, providing no real understanding beyond what we already have.