Morning all,
Was killing some time yesterday at groups.google.com looking up my old email addresses for a laugh. I found a load of usenet posts from about 5 years ago. Came across this one, which I thought was worth re-posting:
>An American 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 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)/t(c)
>
>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. t(c) 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.
Was killing some time yesterday at groups.google.com looking up my old email addresses for a laugh. I found a load of usenet posts from about 5 years ago. Came across this one, which I thought was worth re-posting:
>An American 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 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)/t(c)
>
>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. t(c) 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.
