Intensive science learning

I have been mostly absent for a while and so for those that look forward to my blogs (if there are in fact any) might be expecting that in my sojourn that I was thinking up some great topics for blogs, but alas it is not the case (well that is not entirely true).  I have started back into reviews and blogs though, after a long absence.  I was thinking of some more serious topics to discuss to get me back into the swing, but with the first review I ran across an interesting page in Mystery in Space (it was issue 31).  Mystery in Space is a sort of weird mixture of science fact and science fantasy, with lots of genuinely interesting astronomical facts (even by today's more advanced standards in terms of knowledge) but with also lots of not very accurate science on display (for instance when some characters were walking on the surface of the sun.)  In this particular story though the two characters are trying to determine what a substance can do and go through a fairly decent checklist measuring its intensive characteristics, those being ones not related to the amount of the substance present.  Not really such a bad lesson for the reader as scientists go through similar checklists when identifying a substance (though transmutational abilities is not something which is often tested for) 
 

19 Comments
19 Comments
Edited by Daveyo520

I don't know what kind of scientist you are but transmutational abilities are the first thing I check for.

Posted by cosmo111687

"It doesn't know the words to the national anthem."

"When I sit on it, nothing hatches."

"Rubbing it doesn't produce a genie."

"When I hold it to my ear, it doesn't play Coldplay."

"Placing it on my cranium doesn't give me a full head of hair."

"Giving it tough love doesn't get it to change it's ways."

"Having it in my life doesn't make me me forget how much I miss Carla."

"Testing it for completely arbitrary attributes doesn't justify the time spent testing it."

Posted by PrinceIMC
@cosmo111687 said:

"It doesn't know the words to the national anthem."

"When I sit on it, nothing hatches."

"Rubbing it doesn't produce a genie."

"When I hold it to my ear, it doesn't play Coldplay."

"Placing it on my cranium doesn't give me a full head of hair."

"Giving it tough love doesn't get it to change it's ways."

"Having it in my life doesn't make me me forget how much I miss Carla."

"Testing it for completely arbitrary attributes doesn't justify the time spent testing it."

Now that's funny.
Posted by ReVamp

Nice to see you back!

Posted by RazzaTazz
@Daveyo520: I was thinking about that, it is common but in a different sense.   
 
@cosmo111687:  Those would have been better ;) 
 
@ReVamp: Yes here I am
Moderator
Posted by Daveyo520

@cosmo111687: You should also test how it taste on waffles.

Posted by ReVamp

@RazzaTazz: My mouth is watering.

Posted by RazzaTazz
@Daveyo520: That would be the culinary arts, not science, though really the first chemists were probably cooks 
 
@ReVamp: Doesn't that mean you are hungry?
Moderator
Posted by ReVamp

@RazzaTazz: Indeed. Hungry for blogs.

Edited by Daveyo520

@RazzaTazz: He just likes waffles a lot.

Ok then test how it sounds underwater every 4th Tuesday.

Posted by RazzaTazz
@ReVamp: Oh I shall work some up soon, need to do some back reading, the last week I think I reviewed was 4 weeks ago, which means I am missing an entire month. 
 
@Daveyo520: He already tested some of that 
Moderator
Posted by Daveyo520

@RazzaTazz: How about if it looks nice with red?

Posted by RazzaTazz
@Daveyo520: Thats subjective, not objective
Moderator
Posted by Daveyo520

@RazzaTazz: How about if it enhances sexual performance?

Posted by RazzaTazz
@Daveyo520: Thats both subjective and objective
Moderator
Posted by Daveyo520

@RazzaTazz: Can we measure its girth?

Posted by RazzaTazz
@Daveyo520: Girth would be extensive
Moderator
Posted by Daveyo520

@RazzaTazz: It would have to be.