Tidbits
from
New
Scientist
Magazine
These
non-so-serious
gems
have
appeared
in
the
pages
of
New
Scientist
magazine
over
the
years.
I
don't
know
about
truth,
but
physics
theorists
are
certainly
stranger
than
fiction.
From
an
article
titled
"Globs
in
space",
New
Scientist
(Issue
2253,
26
August
2000,
p.5):
- Could
bizarre
giant
particles
nearly
as
big
as
galaxies,
but
lighter
than
electrons,
dig
cosmology
out
of
a
hole?
[...]
"I
know
it
sounds
crazy,"
says
team
member
Andrei
Gruzinov
[...]
"But
so
far
as
we
can
tell,
no
observations
rule
it
out."
The
weird
particles
could
solve
a
problem
related
to
galaxy
formation
[...]
if
a
particle
was
light
enough
-
just
10-24
times
as
light
as
an
electron
-
its
wavelength
would
be
a
massive
3000
light
years.
In
other
words,
each
particle's
size
would
be
a
significant
fraction
of
the
size
of
a
whole
galaxy.
[...]
Ducks
and
other
birds
flying
into
the
engines
of
low-flying
aircraft
are
a
hazard
at
many
airports
around
the
world.
Now
Gas
Turbine
News
reports
that
Australian
engineers
are
researching
the
problem.
The
difficultly
they
faced
was
how
to
simulate
a
duck
flying
into
an
engine
to
study
what
damage
is
caused
and
how
it
can
be
avoided.
Their
solution
was
not
to
simulate
it
at
all.
Instead,
they
developed
a
gun
that
fires
ducks
at
speeds
of
up
to
273
kilometres
per
hour
into
their
test
engines.
They
claim
that
the
ducks
are
humanely
dispatched
prior
to
being
shot
at
the
engines.
Feedback
profoundly
hopes
this
is
so,
but
does
not
have
the
evidence
at
hand
to
verify
the
claim.
--
From
the
Feedback
column
in
New
Scientist
(1
Apr
1995
p.64)
-
note
the
date.
See
also:
The
Rooster
Booster
from
the
highly
recommended
Useless
Information
Home
Page
28
Sep
2002:
- Reader
Ted
White
tells
us
of
an
offer
he
decided
to
decline.
He
recently
received
a
reminder
notice
from
the
vet
about
vaccinations
for
his
cat.
A
note
at
the
bottom
advertised
a
workshop
that
the
veterinary
practice
was
holding,
with
the
cheery
notice:
"Come
and
learn
what
it
is
like
to
be
neutered!"
From
the
Feedback
column
in
New
Scientist
(Issue
2239,
20
May
2000,
p.100):Issue
2237,
6
May
2000,
p.92:
- Could
there
be
a
contradiction
here?
Farnell
Electronic
Components
of
Leeds
sells
the
"Sakura
Marker
Water
Soluble
Crayon".
In
the
catalogue
description
it
says:
"Marks
almost
any
surface,
even
under
water."
Issue
2236,
29
Apr
2000,
p.92:
Issue
2236,
29
Apr
2000,
p.92:
- Here,
it
seems,
is
a
job
opportunity
for
a
good
chemist.
While
he
was
changing
the
toner
cartridge
of
his
Canon
photocopier,
David
Whittle
checked
the
label
to
see
if
there
was
anything
that
might
stop
him
from
recycling
the
old
container.
Prominently
marked
where
he
expected
to
find
a
list
of
"ingredients"
was:
"Contents
partially
unknown."
- Another
redundant
product
instruction.
Frederieke
Kroon
recently
bought
a
little
plastic
container
with
a
screw-on
lid
for
storing
items
of
food
in
the
fridge.
The
label
on
it
told
him:
"Remove
lid
before
use."
23
October
1999:
- One
of
the
worst
design
faults
of
the
computer
keyboard
is
the
proximity
of
the
Control
key
to
the
Shift
key.
Feedback
has
often
hit
Control
by
mistake
when
trying
to
type
a
capital
letter
and
found
the
text
behaving
in
mysterious
and
unwelcome
ways.
A
friend
of
reader
Douglas
Gray
had
a
particularly
unfortunate
experience
of
this.
He
was
attempting
to
type
the
word
FALSE
in
the
Textpad
text-editing
program,
but
held
down
the
Control
key
instead
of
the
adjacent
Shift
key.
Ctrl-F
had
no
significant
effect
(it
performed
his
most
recent
"Find").
Ctrl-A
selected
all
of
his
document.
Ctrl-L
converted
the
whole
thing
to
lower
case.
Ctrl-S
saved
the
new
form.
Ctrl-E
centred
each
line.
The
outcome
was
that
he
had
a
document
entirely
in
lower
case
and
resembling
a
Christmas
tree.
This
was
amusing
until
Gray's
friend
discovered
there
was
no
way
of
recovering
a
sensible
version,
as
the
Undo
key
(Ctrl-Z)
wouldn't
go
beyond
the
last
save.
9
October
1999:
- Simone,
who
cleans
Feedback's
office,
eagerly
awaits
inventions
based
on
the
work
of
Jean-Marc
Vanden-Broeck,
a
mathematician
at
the
University
of
East
Anglia,
who
shared
the
Ig
Nobel
Physics
prize
for
calculating
how
to
make
a
teapot
spout
that
doesn't
drip.
No
such
thing
exists
today,
but
if
theory
can
be
translated
into
practice
no
one
will
have
to
mop
up
puddles
of
tea
on
the
kitchen
counter.
- Spouts
are
among
the
few
details
not
mentioned
in
the
six-page
specification
for
the
proper
way
to
make
a
cup
of
tea
that
earned
the
British
Standards
Institution
the
Ig
Nobel
Prize
in
Literature.
BSI
developed
the
standard
to
help
the
tea
industry
quantify
its
taste
tests.
At
£20
a
copy,
standard
BS-6008:1980/ISO-3103:1980
is
pricey,
but
it
is
brimful
of
detail.
"Fill
the
pot
containing
the
tea
with
freshly
boiling
water
to
within
4
to
6
millimetres
of
the
brim...
Allow
the
tea
to
brew
for
6
minutes,
and
then,
holding
the
lid
in
place
so
that
the
infused
leaf
is
held
back,
pour
the
liquid
through
the
serrations
into
the
bowl..."Nowhere,
however,
is
there
mention
of
the
ritual
of
warming
the
pot,
central
to
the
mystical
British
Tea
Ceremony.
That
aside,
Feedback
recommends
keeping
copies
on
hand
to
distribute
to
airline
flight
attendants
and
others
whose
idea
of
brewing
tea
is
dropping
a
tea
bag
into
a
cup
of
lukewarm
water.
2
October
1999:
- Reader
Peter
Fyfe
was
puzzled
by
a
bottle
of
"Charleston's
of
Tasmania
Australian
Mineral
Water",
which,
the
label
boasts,
is
"the
world's
purest".
The
label
adds:
"The
water
has
been
carbon-dated
to
around
6000
years
old
and
contains
no
traces
of
chemicals.
It
remains
unaffected
by
the
nuclear
radiation
present
in
all
other
water
(including
rainwater)
since
the
advent
of
the
nuclear
age.
It
is
also
the
only
Australian
mineral
water
known
to
contain
natural
fluoride."
Water
containing
fluoride
and
yet
free
of
chemicals?
Carbon-dated
and
yet
free
of
nuclear
radiation?
How
do
they
do
it?
25
Sept
2000:
18
Sept
2000:
11
Sept
2000:
- Being
dead
has
its
advantages.
Timothy
Surendonk's
fiancée
received
a
form
notifying
her
that
she
had
been
included
on
the
jury
service
roll
for
Parramatta,
New
South
Wales.
Curious
about
the
policy
on
exemptions
from
service,
Surendonk
read
the
list
of
valid
excuses.
There
were
three
classes
of
exemption.
The
first
covered
those
disqualified
from
jury
service--people
who
have
been
in
trouble
with
the
law.
The
second
concerned
those
ineligible
for
service--law
enforcers,
the
sick,
the
armed
forces.
The
final
category
consisted
of
those
who
can
claim
an
exemption
if
they
wish.
The
list
includes
clergy,
doctors,
pharmacists,
mine
managers
and
deceased
persons.
Fortunately,
if
the
deceased
person
is
unable
to
check
their
mail,
their
friends
or
relatives
are
allowed
to
return
the
form.
As
for
those
who
die
friendless
and
with
no
relatives,
evidently
they
have
to
serve.
- However,
there
is
some
reassuring
news
for
those
who
want
to
be
doubly
sure
they
won't
be
deprived
of
the
opportunity
to
do
jury
service
by
their
demise.
Jan
McNeill
writes
that
the
Bonus
Certificate
she
received
from
her
insurance
company,
the
Mutual
Life
and
Citizens'
Assurance
Company
of
New
South
Wales,
assured
her
that:
"Your
above
insurance
policy
provides
valuable
protection
against
death."
- Finally,
thank-you
to
our
youngest
ever
contributor,
James
Glanville
(aged
7),
for
sending
us
the
box
his
sister's
toy
pushchair
came
in.
On
one
side
is
a
picture
of
a
happy
little
girl
playing
with
a
doll
seated
in
the
pushchair.
Above
it
there
is
an
explanatory
note
to
avoid
disappointment
when
the
box
is
opened:
"Doll
and
child
not
included."
28
Aug
1999:
- Aeroplane
crashes,
it
turns
out,
are
surprisingly
good
for
your
mental
health.
Gary
Capobianco
and
Thanos
Patelis,
two
American
psychologists,
compared
15
crash
survivors
with
a
control
group
of
frequent
fliers
who
hadn't
crashed.
They
found
that
the
survivors
were
less
prone
to
anxiety,
depression
and
post-traumatic
stress.
"The
psychological
wellbeing
of
airplane
crash
survivors
compared
to
air
travellers
who
have
never
been
involved
in
any
type
of
aviation
accident
or
crash
was
much
better
on
all
the
levels
measured.
The
crash
survivors
actually
scored
lower
on
several
standardised
measures
of
emotional
distress
than
the
flyers
who
hadn't
been
in
an
accident,"
said
the
authors.
However,
there
is
a
drawback
to
this
particular
method
of
achieving
a
positive
outlook
on
life.
The
reason
Capobianco
and
Patelis
only
interviewed
15
crash
survivors
is
that
these
were
all
they
could
find--
because
the
survival
rate
from
plane
crashes
is
so
low.