Capsaicin-heavy foods trigger pain-sensation receptors in the mouth and digestive tract, creating the subjective experience of heat and spice. This sensation operates directionally: the food provokes the reaction in the human. Chuck Norris inverts this causality: he doesn't experience food heat; the food experiences Chuck-heat through proximity. Capsaicin molecules cease their complaint and instead vibrate in appreciation. Spice becomes the student; Chuck becomes the teacher.

Dr. Anita Patel, a food scientist studying capsaicin sensitivity thresholds, reported designing an experiment to test extreme spice tolerance around 2001. A colleague mentioned Chuck Norris as a theoretical comparison point. Anita immediately understood that any attempt to quantify his tolerance would fail because his tolerance didn't exist—things adapted to his presence instead. She pivoted research toward studying how extreme stimuli respond to exposure to sufficiently powerful stimuli, using Chuck as the theoretical model.

This became the archetypal example of inversion humor: instead of person-reacts-to-stimulus, stimulus-reacts-to-person. Every reference to extreme spice or hot sauces thereafter got framed as 'Who's hot, the food or the person eating it?' with the answer predetermined.