Science Marches On
A new generation of scientists is here, and ready to take on the really tough questions. First we had the researchers mentioned in our previous item, daring to ask whether the constants that drive our universe are really as constant as we assume. And now this:
Australian scientists have proved what is common knowledge to most people -- that teaspoons appear to have minds of their own.
In a study at their own facility, a group of scientists from the Macfarlane Burnet Institute for Medical Research and Public Health in Melbourne secretly numbered 70 teaspoons and tracked their movements over five months.
Supporting their expectations, 80 percent of the spoons vanished during the period -- although those in private areas of the institute lasted nearly twice as long as those in communal sections.
"At this rate, an estimated 250 teaspoons would need to be purchased annually to maintain a workable population of 70 teaspoons," they wrote in Friday's festive edition of the British Medical Journal.
Fascinating. I would like to see a comparison study in the US. I think our lower rates of tea consumption might have made us less sensitive to this phenomenon. Perhaps teaspoons have been disappearing here and no one even noticed!
On the other hand, maybe our spoons are safe from this strange effect. What we really need in this country -- or at least at my house -- is a serious study of where all those socks are going.
Comments
Actually, my biggest problem is losing finger nail clippers. In college, I must have bought 20 finger nail clippers in a couple years. I never left the apartment with them, or not intentionally anyway. I wasn't throwing them away. So where'd they go?
I thought they must be getting left under piles of books or clothes or under couch cushions or something. I figured if I bought enough of 'em, I'd reach a saturation point where I'd be able to find one just by casually looking under stuff. But apparently 20 was far too few to reach the saturation point. But imagine if you'd lost thousands of them in an apartment. I mean, you'd practically be able to find one under every item, or behind every cushion. So what's the saturation level, where it takes less than 30 seconds to find one?
Posted by: jaydfox![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.blog.speculist.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
December 23, 2005 11:00 AM
This is why the rivet which holds fingernail clippers together is hollow. Put a lanyard thru it and fasten the other end to a dresser drawer handle. Since doing that I have lost only toenail clippers.
Posted by: triticale![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.blog.speculist.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
December 23, 2005 08:04 PM
The sock problem is detected when an odd number of socks are counted at the end of the laundry cycle. The workaround is to use an odd number of socks as the input to the washer. This way, if an odd number are counted after drying it is what you expected. If there is an even number then you are ahead of the game in having only pairs with no strays.
You're welcome.
Posted by: Fred![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.blog.speculist.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
December 25, 2005 01:56 PM
According to the Sniglets dictionary those missing socks go to the "hozone layer."
Posted by: Stephen Gordon![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.blog.speculist.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
December 28, 2005 07:58 AM