Mysteries of Science

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Einstein's Principle of Retardation

Explain Art Nouveau.

Explain toast falling on the buttered side!!!

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Explain toast falling on the buttered side!!!

Myth busters already did that.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Explain toast falling on the buttered side!!!

That side weighs more?

Originally posted by Robtard
That side weighs more?

Nah. They actually had a slight number in favor of the un-buttered side.

It's probably because the unbuttered side isn't as smooth, and, therefore, "spins" through the half faster/easier and the other side doesn't spin as fast due to more "wind" resistance. Meaning, it could spin, ever so slightly, faster, on the buttered side, than the un-buttered. The percent differene in "spin" could be a direct function of the differences in landing on buttered verses unbuttered side.

The idea that buttered side falls down more than the other side is probably due to some psychological phenomena. You remember the "slightly" more traumatic event of dropping your toast, buttered side, due to the mess and heart-ache it creates. So, it sticks with you brain, more. When you recall the memory, it is more "solid" than the "unscathed" toast-dropping incident, and, therefore, isn't remembered as much. Just a hunch.

I hold toast and the buttering of toast to be of extreme importance.

Drop the toast you say, not on my watch... not on my watch.

Originally posted by Robtard
I hold toast and the buttering of toast to be of extreme importance.

Drop the toast you say, not on my watch... not on my watch.

K. I won't drop it on your watch.

Originally posted by Robtard
Drop the toast you say, not on my watch... not on my watch.

Originally posted by queeq
Explain love.

Seriously, how can you not know how the scientific method works?

Originally posted by One Free Man
Everything we can't explain can be explained by scientist's theories which, true or not, will be accepted as fact and "improved upon" until there is an aspect of the theory that deals with any disproof of said theory.

Seriously, how can you not know how the scientific method works?

So in short, make up some bullshit that can't be proved wrong or right because "they" just don't know.

Exactly. Big Bang, black holes, water on mars=life on mars, particle theory, etc.

Edit: religions too. Just keeping objective.

Originally posted by Robtard
So in short, make up some bullshit that can't be proved wrong or right because "they" just don't know.

You act like you don't already know this rule. 😂

Originally posted by One Free Man
Exactly. Big Bang, black holes, water on mars=life on mars, particle theory, etc.

Edit: religions too. Just keeping objective.

Black holes can be disproven if you find a major flaw in general relativity (good luck). Scientists didn't say water on mars equals life on mars, they said that it could mean that there was once life there. I'm not sure how you would go about disproving the existence of atoms given that we have pictures of them and innumerable experiments demonstrating that they exist.

The Big Bang always struck me as creation for scientists, though.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Black holes can be disproven if you find a major flaw in general relativity (good luck). Scientists didn't say water on mars equals life on mars, they said that it could mean that there was once life there. I'm not sure how you would go about disproving the existence of atoms given that we have pictures of them and innumerable experiments demonstrating that they exist.

The Big Bang always struck me as creation for scientists, though.

Big Bang is when protons formed the first atoms and the universe sprang to life as a massive light. (It was when it cooled enough..n'stuff.)

Do I win the threadz?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Big Bang is when protons formed the first atoms and the universe sprang to life as a massive light. (It was when it cooled enough..n'stuff.)

Do I win the threadz?

Yes that describes it but what do we have that predict the Big Bang, what do we have predicted by the Big Bang?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Nah. They actually had a slight number in favor of the un-buttered side.

It's probably because the unbuttered side isn't as smooth, and, therefore, "spins" through the half faster/easier and the other side doesn't spin as fast due to more "wind" resistance. Meaning, it could spin, ever so slightly, faster, on the buttered side, than the un-buttered. The percent differene in "spin" could be a direct function of the differences in landing on buttered verses unbuttered side.

The idea that buttered side falls down more than the other side is probably due to some psychological phenomena. You remember the "slightly" more traumatic event of dropping your toast, buttered side, due to the mess and heart-ache it creates. So, it sticks with you brain, more. When you recall the memory, it is more "solid" than the "unscathed" toast-dropping incident, and, therefore, isn't remembered as much. Just a hunch.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think the height matters a lot, buttered toast probably falls more often on the buttered side because it can only manage a half rotation from the 1 to 1.5 m height it is usually dropped.

You have to control with a non-buttered piece of toast, and with a piece of toast dropped buttered side down.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You have to control with a non-buttered piece of toast, and with a piece of toast dropped buttered side down.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think I'll pass on testing it, I'll just throw hypothesis out there and you guys can prove them.

Nah. It's been done: on mythbusters. They did exactly what I said they were supposed to do.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Nah. It's been done: on mythbusters. They did exactly what I said they were supposed to do.

Fun show, that