Theory of Hovering

R

Rumble

Guest
Disclaimer: The following amusing post is a bit complex and long-winded so I suggest that Tohtori does not read it. It might stimulate his brain and cause an unfortunate posting accident.


An American magazine held a competition inviting its readers to submit new scientific theories on ANY subject. Below is the winner:

Subject: The Theory of Hovering

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)/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.
 
U

Uncle Sick(tm)

Guest
Originally posted by Rumble
Disclaimer: The following amusing post is a bit complex and long-winded so I suggest that Tohtori does not read it. It might stimulate his brain and cause an unfortunate posting accident.


Nice one. ;)
*cackles*
 
M

Murcalumis

Guest
Originally posted by Rumble
Subject: The Theory of Hovering

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.

Why! That makes perfect sense! Why didn't I think of that before?
 
M

Murcalumis

Guest
Re: Re: Theory of Hovering

Originally posted by Murcalumis


Why! That makes perfect sense! Why didn't I think of that before?

Wait... wait... I know what Sarafan would say; 'coz u aer ghey!!!!! l00000000l'

I posted for him, now he might not bother saying anything. Well, here's to hoping.
 
S

Sharma

Guest
Do you know that makes absolute perfect sense?

i would have the right mind to experiment if i wasnt afriar of the RSPCA kicking my ass for cruelty, although i own a cat who is mad enough to do it herself :D

i love my cat, i wouldnt want to cover her in chicken tikka masala and drop her off the empire state building :D

hmmmmm

if two opposing forces acted on each other wouldnt they cancel each toher out thus falling to the ground? think about it, its like wave neutralisation, if there is one positive wave form, a negative wave form can be generated to cancel them out thus removing effects of both waves, so i guess if the cat was dropped it would fall to the ground as both forces had canceled each other out, OR perhaps you are corect in theorising that the cat would perhaps hover in the air since the force of the bread would be equal to the cats, mebe if the cats were more larger so that the toast cannot generate an exact opposite force to resist the gravitational pull of the cat to the ground.

i dont know what the hell i just said but hey, go figure :D
 
R

Rumble

Guest
With our current British Railway network crumbling around us the cat/toast/butter/tika/carpet monorail system would provide a viable alternative to our transportation problems.

Be afraid if Labour government budget spending shows a sudden movement in said cat/toast/butter/tika/carpet research, as things stand they are stupid enough to try anything.

As to your theorising consider that buttered toast lands butter-side down and cats land on their feet. With the buttered toast strapped to the cats back butter-side up the levitating 'should' work in principle. Reality and logic, on the other hand, tell me I should be getting some sleep before I start to believe this is possible.

Its laughable really because I know my cat would nip to the nearest neighbours for some free food thus breaking the link in the monorail and causing a horrible accident.

Hmm hang on how would the cat move when its levitating ;)
 
O

old.Tohtori

Guest
Originally posted by Rumble
Disclaimer: The following amusing post is a bit complex and long-winded so I suggest that Tohtori does not read it. It might stimulate his brain and cause an unfortunate posting accident.

Oops...guess i read it afterall. Actually i don't even need to flame this, since you do a smashing job in flaming yourself...not to mention your threeholed lover in your avatar.
 
S

sarafan

Guest
Re: Re: Re: Theory of Hovering

Originally posted by Murcalumis


Wait... wait... I know what Sarafan would say; 'coz u aer ghey!!!!! l00000000l'

I posted for him, now he might not bother saying anything. Well, here's to hoping.

tats cause yuo are teh ghey!"@!"¬!¬_!"~¬~¬~
 
M

Murcalumis

Guest
<sighs> Sometimes I wish you'd just die, Sarafan...

No wait, that's a lie, I'm sorry. I wish you were dead. Must remember that past tense thing, musn't I?
 
L

Lochlyessa

Guest
This signature does not represent on how I feel about my stormcalling its called "Sarcasm" if you are truly dense
enough to believe that this is real, you must of gone to a special school

- quite apt really, mentioning special schools, then saying 'must of', when the correct usage would've been 'must have'. Just because must've sounds like 'must of' when you're saying it, doesn't mean its spelt that way.

Pedantic whine for the day, over.
 
O

old.Gombur Glodson

Guest
racoon.jpg
 
S

Sarum TheBlack

Guest
There is a big long discussion of this somewhere else... by top physicists and stuff I think... back when I find it.
 
G

Gimly

Guest
Cheers guys.. made my shit day at work seem not quite so bad :) :clap:
 
S

sarafan

Guest
Originally posted by Lochlyessa
This signature does not represent on how I feel about my stormcalling its called "Sarcasm" if you are truly dense
enough to believe that this is real, you must of gone to a special school

- quite apt really, mentioning special schools, then saying 'must of', when the correct usage would've been 'must have'. Just because must've sounds like 'must of' when you're saying it, doesn't mean its spelt that way.

Pedantic whine for the day, over.

dont you people get it? i put fucking spelling mistakes on purpsos :D just so you can get your cheesey fingers moving

and yes i did spell purpose incorrectly but as you can see why i did it!and yuo are teh gh3y ¬+!!~"~!~¬!"+"
<("<) (>"<) (>")>
 
J

Jexa

Guest
Great post Rumble :D :D :D

safaran: Let me guess .... the grammar mistakes were deliberate too?
 
S

sarafan

Guest
uh huh :D

Silly sb.. oh, nop, theres 4 there

Is there a word in the dictionary 'nop'? This is clearly an abbreviation of the word 'Nope' this is incorrect English.


Stop criticizing my sig if you can’t correct your own
 
J

Jexa

Guest
Originally posted by sarafan
uh huh :D



Is there a word in the dictionary 'nop'? This is clearly an abbreviation of the word 'Nope' this is incorrect English.


Stop criticizing my sig if you can’t correct your own

Nice one, moron. You were slating Loch for using an abbreviation when you used one in the following sentence.

Unless you were actually trying to be sarcastically stupid, which I very much doubt, leave Loch alone!!

(Love ya Loch! :))
 
S

sarafan

Guest
um i allways use them its about signatures not the posts
 
U

Uncle Sick(tm)

Guest
Don't argue about grammar and spelling with crotchsniffer, Jexa.
It's pointless... he is just too thick to get it.

Just ignore the kid.
 
J

Jexa

Guest
It seems possible (maybe even probable) that he is the stupidest person to wander on to these forums to date.
 
M

Murcalumis

Guest
I don't know. Sigurd (was that it?) comes pretty close. '1 day soon im going to kill you all and feed youre remains to ur parents.'

That was fun.
 
U

Uncle Sick(tm)

Guest
*nods*
Don't forget Mr. l337 -cougar from Nolby Whatever...
He and Sarafan must be related in some kind of way.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom