Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)
Report an error
Google searches for 'humble pi' correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Solar power generated in The Bahamas | r=0.92 | 12yrs | No |
| Renewable energy production in The Bahamas | r=0.92 | 12yrs | No |
| The average number of likes on Simone Giertz's YouTube videos | r=0.9 | 10yrs | No |
| Average number of comments on SmarterEveryDay YouTube videos | r=0.87 | 17yrs | No |
| Total length of The Game Theorists YouTube videos | r=0.86 | 15yrs | No |
| The number of septic tank servicers and sewer pipe cleaners in Idaho | r=0.74 | 19yrs | Yes! |
| The number of hazardous materials removal workers in Kansas | r=0.73 | 19yrs | Yes! |
| The number of movies Will Smith appeared in | r=0.71 | 19yrs | No |
| Pfizer's stock price (PFE) | r=0.69 | 20yrs | No |
| Shark attacks in the United States | r=0.56 | 19yrs | No |
Google searches for 'humble pi' also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)
