Science humour

By Lorenzo

Have you seen this cat?

Does it generate a sense of uncertainty?

This is the Saturday chit-chat post.


  1. Posted September 23, 2012 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    Science humor:
    Newton, Einstein, Pascal, Archimedes (and any others you care to think of) decide to play a game of hide and seek, with Einstein “it” … counting to 100.
    All the others go off and find places to hide … apart from Newton, who just draws a metre-by-a-metre square on the ground and sits in the middle.
    Einstein opens his eyes … and says “Oh … that’s not very good Newton … I found you straight away”. Newton says “No … you found Pascal“.

  2. Posted September 23, 2012 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    Anti-vivisectionist here. I would have slammed old Schro up against a wall or maybe locked him in a small space with many cats.

    But to your question, it generates the sense that The Big Bang Theory TV show is responsible since it’s continual references and explanations of Schroedinger’s and String Theory have alerted thousands of viewers who would not otherwise …

    (tried posting this 10 mins ago and was rejected. good to see you back)

  3. Posted September 23, 2012 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    AnnODyne – Schrodinger’s experiment can only involve the death of the cat if you open the box to look. Attempting to free the cat from the experiment dramatically increases the chance of it being definitely deaded.
    (And that he used a cat … giggles … a genius assumed that cats are too dumb to be a conscious observer despite them patently only recognizing their own existence as important – big logic problem there – unless it was anaesthetized)
    Now the experiment no-one wants to do ends in the following picture (nsfw – f bomb in caption) … Can cats swim?

  4. Bodi Jelen
    Posted September 23, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    Schrodinger was clearly a cat hater. No animal-loving person would do that to an animal, not even in theory.

  5. kvd
    Posted September 23, 2012 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    [email protected] I’d always assumed that he factored in the 9 lives hypothesis, and figured that one for science wasn’t that bad a deal? Also, anyone who would think to open a box which contained a heretofore enboxed cat needs their head read – or full body armour 😉

  6. Posted September 23, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

    [email protected] …. yes to the body armour … at the risk of getting AnnODyne all disgusted, I was a big fan of ether to get cats quiet and THEN use the barbiturate-filled needle. (Non biologists can imagine trying to put give a cat a bath while holding a roasting skewer in your hand.)

    The problem most “animal lovers” don’t appreciate about experiments on animals is the toll it takes on lab workers, who often went into biology in the first place because they like life in general and animals in particular. So sacrificing them every day … it’s not nice, but you want to have people doing that job who don’t like doing it, and show the animals respect, and yet, you have to put on the “it doesn’t bother me” exterior. Japanese lab workers have a nice way to help them cope with this, a “thanksgiving ceremony” each year to acknowledge the animals they have sacrificed. I /think/ it’s buddhist based. Great idea.

  7. Posted September 23, 2012 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    LE – One might be a “designated sacrificer” because of efficiency, and rather do it than someone who would fumble and cause suffering, while still not enjoying the killing at all.

  8. fxh
    Posted September 23, 2012 at 8:48 pm | Permalink

    Dropped out of science and went into law?

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *