• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

scattered scientific theories...??? (merged with: what's the speed of dark?)

Stompr

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 6, 2000
Messages
330
Scattered Scietific Theories....???

An American (on-line) magazine held a competition, inviting its readers to submit new scientific theories on ANY subject.
Below is the winner:
Subject: Perpetual Motion
When a cat is dropped, it always lands on its feet, and when toast is dropped, it always lands buttered side down. Therefore, if a slice of toast is strapped to a cat's back, buttered side up, and the animal is
then dropped, the two opposing forces will cause it to hover, spinning inches above the ground. If enough toast-laden felines were used, they could form the basis of a high-speed monorail system.
......and then this mail got this reply from one of the recipients:
I've been thinking about this cat/toast business for a while. In the buttered toast case, it's the butter that causes it to land buttered side down - it doesn't have to be toast, the theory works equally well with
Jacob's crackers. So to save money you just miss out the toast - and butter the cats. Also, should there be an imbalance between the effects of cat and butter, there are other substances that have a stronger affinity for carpet.
Probability of carpet impact is determined by the following simple formula:
p = s * t(t)/tc
where p is the probability of carpet impact
s is the "stain" value of the toast-covering substance - an indicator of the effectiveness of the toast topping in permanently staining the carpet.
Chicken Tikka Masala, for example, has a very high s value, while the s value of water is zero.
tc and t(t) indicate the tone of the carpet and topping - the value of p being strongly related to the relationship between the colour of the carpet and topping, as even chicken tikka masala won't cause a permanent
and obvious stain if the carpet is the same colour.
So it is obvious that the probability of carpet impact is maximised if you use chicken tikka masala and a white carpet - in fact this combination gives a p value of one, which is the same as the probability of a cat landing on its feet.
Therefore a cat with chicken tikka masala on its back will be certain to hover in mid air, while there could be problems with buttered toast as the toast may fall off the cat, causing a terrible monorail crash resulting in nauseating images of members of the royal family visiting accident victims
in hospital, and politicians saying it wouldn't have happened if their party was in power as there would have been more investment in cat-toast glue research.
Therefore it is in the interests not only of public safety but also public sanity if the buttered toast on cats idea is scrapped, to be replaced by a monorail powered by cats smeared with chicken tikka masala floating above a rail made from white shag pile carpet.
Ummmmm.........any others???
------------------
STOMPRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
 
You've always got the old is hell exothermic one:
-------------------------
A True story. A thermodynamics professor had written a take home exam for his graduate students. It had one question:
"Is hell exothermic or endothermic? Support your answer with a proof."
Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law or some variant. One student, however wrote the following:
First, we postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass.
If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.
As for souls entering hell, lets look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to hell. Since, there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and all souls go to hell.
With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially.
Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant.
So, if hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.
Of course, if hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, than the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.
----------------
There is also the one that proves women are evil, but I'll leave that one offsite
smile.gif

[This message has been edited by pundi (edited 13 June 2001).]
 
Maybe we could use the cat/toast thing for space travel.
If we were to butter the cats feet and point the cat towards the moon (paws first of course), the combination of repulsion of the cat's back towards the earth and the positive attraction between the paws / butter for the moon might provide adequate force to transport stuff. It might also just cause a violent flipping action that results in the cat remaining stuck to the earth.
Just think of the possibilities. Mind you a cat in a space suit would be pretty damn funny
smile.gif
..
------------------
caution: raver pr0n involving elmo... (884Kb)
 
pundi: why would the cat's buttered paws be attracted to the moon?
 
yaya: it was made on the assumption that if you were on the moon and dropped your toast, it would still fall buttered side down. This is one of the many reasons we should return to the moon, this time with cats to determine if they still fall on their feet.
smile.gif

I've developed a crude space vehicle that will allow us to travel vast distances, with minimal energy costs (just enough to keep three cats alive). The cat/butters attraction for other planets may be small, but if it acts constantly then enormous speeds will be developed in the frictionless environment of space.
I apologise for the really bad pictures of cats (they have already been likened to teddy bears), but I haven't the will power to do better when I really should be studying
smile.gif
...
As can be seen a net force towards the moon/planet will be developed. The stabilising cats will create equalising moments about the vehicle so as to keep it pointed in the correct direction.
Anorexic cats would be better as gravitational forces would be minimised. To develop greater acceleration in space, this arrangement could be connected in parallel, with many cats pointing towards the desired target.
 
A couple of things I was wondering about last time I was scattered:
---------------------------
1) The IQ test
Say I sit an IQ test and get a reported IQ of 100. Now say that I am a left hander (which I am). Left handers are not supposed to have the same patterns of dominant thought as a right hander, and so (I reasoned) will have a slightly worse score on an IQ test as compared to a right hander.
Surely then, there is some general constant that can be used (well actually 2 constants, depending on whether the left-handedness was caused by brain damage or genetic reasons) with which the IQ score can be multiplied to give a real reading. I assume that there is another constant for descriminating genders, given the differences between audio/visual uptake processing.
--------------------------------
Now for the fun one.
2) Relative time
Along the same lines, say for instance Person A has a thought speed 30% faster than Person B. Because person A is thinking faster, they get to experience 30% more thoughts than person B. This could be equated to 30% more life, since life is only experienced while a person is conscious.
Furthermore, because this is all that Person A has ever known, he measures time with respect to the speed of his thinking. If his thoughts were to slow to the rate of person B's, then time would apparently speed up for him. Time is therefore relative to speed of thinking.
This could be formally expressed as such:
Time is inversely proportional to the speed of thought.
Relative time for person A = (thought speed of b/thought speed of a) * normal time
Relative time for person B = 1/(Thought speed of B/Thought speed of A) * normal time = (thought speed of a/thought speed of b) * normal time
Therefore, when taken in context, a 70 year old person may only have experienced a normal 50 years
smile.gif
 
my, my, some people have wayyyyy too much thinking time on their hands, and i must also, as i'm sitting here reading this, and it's all making sense, in a strange kind of way.
 
Pundi : if u were to have cat propelled spacecraft, wouldnt it need to be equipped with heat shields for the cats so they dont burn up in the atmosphere? And once u fit it with heat shields, the buttered effect would get cancelled out.
 
nah, you don't need heat shields, cos you're going to the moon, which has bugger all atmosphere to fry cats in. you might struggle to get back to earth tho.
and if the cats do happen to cook up on entry, i suggest pundi add a steamer, some spices and some soy sauce to his design for some dim sim action.
 
This is wicked stuff, when's the thesis gonna be done?
I think this should actually get published in some journal.
 
WOW... if Id known all this I would have done my thesis on cats and marg instead of bugs and dirt LOL
wink.gif

I have a few simpler little ideas myself heheh
wink.gif

1) Squid are really aliens.... apparently squids have green blood, they have no skeleton, they swim pretty fast, they are somewhat intelligent (they can figure out simple puzzles) and they are generally a mysterious animal
and if this little munchkin is not an alien, what is http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues96/may96/vampire_jpg.html
2) I think everyone has this thought at some stage ..... what if we are like bacteria on a larger being? .. what if the universe is just 1 atom of a larger compound?
you can think about that shit for hours!!
[This message has been edited by fataliss (edited 14 June 2001).]
 
Ok guys here it is, the theory to end all theories... Finally proof that women are evil.
We all know that money is the root of all evil..... right????
well. Therefore
women.gif

Cold hard proof that women are evil :p
[This message has been edited by ChEmIcaL_NiGhT (edited 14 June 2001).]
 
komplex: a few cats in the name of science and discovery is a risk I'm willing to take. De Quincey's idea also highlights a possible way to make this financially viable, or feed the brave astronauts when they reach their distant destinations.
Here's another scientific thesis, that was recieved via email. Jenny Craig can go and get stuffed is all I say. Scary part is, it's all thermodynamically correct.
-------------------------
BEER AND ICE CREAM DIET
As we all know, it takes 1 calorie to heat 1 gram of water 1 degree centigrade. Translated into meaningful terms, this means that if you eat a very cold dessert (generally consisting of water in large part), the natural processes which raise the consumed dessert to body temperature during the digestive cycle literally sucks the calories out of the only available source, your body fat.
For example, a dessert served and eaten at near 0 degrees C (32.2 deg.F) will in a short time be raised to the normal body temperature of 37 degrees C (98.6 deg. F). For each gram of dessert eaten, that process takes approximately 37 calories as stated above. The average dessert portion is 6 oz, or 168 grams. Therefore, by operation of thermodynamic law, 6,216 calories (1 cal./gm/ deg. x 37 deg. x 168 gms) are extracted from body fat as the dessert's temperature is normalized.
Allowing for the 1,200 latent calories in the dessert, the net calorie loss is approximately 5,000 calories.
Obviously, the more cold dessert you eat,the better off you are and the faster you will lose weight, if that is your goal.
This process works equally well when drinking very cold beer in frosted glasses. Each ounce of beer contains 16 latent calories, but extracts 1,036 calories (6,216 cal. per 6 oz. portion) in the temperature normalizing process. Thus the net calorie loss per ounce of beer is 1,020 calories. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to calculate that 12,240 calories (12 oz. x 1,020 cal./oz.) are extracted from the body in the process of drinking a can of beer.
Frozen desserts, e.g., ice cream, are even more beneficial, since it takes 83 cal./gm to melt them (i.e., raise them to 0 deg. C) and an additional 37 cal./gm to further raise them to body temperature. The results here are really remarkable, and it beats running hands down.
Unfortunately, for those who eat pizza as an excuse to drink beer, pizza (loaded with latent calories and served above body temperature) induces an opposite effect. But, thankfully, as the astute reader should have already reasoned, the obvious solution is to drink a lot of beer with pizza and follow up immediately with large bowls of ice cream.
We could all be thin if we were to adhere religiously to a pizza, beer, and ice cream diet.
Happy eating!
-------------
Oh, and squids have green blood because they use lime instead of iron in their blood... (slightly less efficient I think)
------------------
:: This space for sale ::
 
that diet theory sounds great, except for the millions of americans who've been trying it for years (call it independent research or whatever).
those bastards are the fattest on earth.
explain that, Dr Scientist?
wink.gif

(maybe they've been secretly munching on hot pop-tarts and cheesburgers)...
 
The cat and the chicken malasa. bwwwwwhahahahahahah ROTFLMAO.
Man thats funny.
 
BioHazard etc: There actually is a journal published with these sorts of studies. It's called the "Annals of Improbable Research" and is an absolute pisser to read. Some of my fave articles: "How dead is a doornail?", "Transmission of gonorrhoea through inflatable doll", "The effects of peanut butter on the rotation of the earth", etc. They have prizes every year for the most ridiculous ideas submitted. Try www.improbable.com.
------------------
"You drive," he said. "I think there's something wrong with me." - Hunter S. Thompson, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"
 
Top