Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Desperate Times
They say that desperate times call for desperate measures. I'm a believer. We lost power to our kitchen and living room this week as a result of a faulty breaker. This necessitated a little creativity during the preparation of food. For example, here's a picture of Sam's waffles being toasted in the bathroom.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Update
It's been one week without toilet paper. Not the we don't have any. But they don't. I don't know what they're doing, but it must not be pleasant.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The Toilet Paper Experiment
Mike and I are sharing a bathroom with two of our other roommates. I have recently proposed and experiment with a hypothesis that has been scarily accurate.
We were almost out of toilet paper. And, given my roommates' dedication to the cleanliness of our apartment (read: none), I proposed to Mike the following: we would ask them to provide the next gross of toilet paper and stockpile several rolls in our room. When we ran out, we would tap our resources and wait and see how long they go without this particular necessity. We did, and our bathroom ran out of paper last Wednesday. It has been almost five days since, and still no toilet paper has been purchased. Mike and I are still good for at least two more weeks, but that's hardly the issue. Frankly, I'm baffled. I don't know what they are doing, where they are going, how good they are at "holding it," or what kind of disgusting conditions they are willing to put up with; but one thing's for sure—five days is a long time to go without TP.
We were almost out of toilet paper. And, given my roommates' dedication to the cleanliness of our apartment (read: none), I proposed to Mike the following: we would ask them to provide the next gross of toilet paper and stockpile several rolls in our room. When we ran out, we would tap our resources and wait and see how long they go without this particular necessity. We did, and our bathroom ran out of paper last Wednesday. It has been almost five days since, and still no toilet paper has been purchased. Mike and I are still good for at least two more weeks, but that's hardly the issue. Frankly, I'm baffled. I don't know what they are doing, where they are going, how good they are at "holding it," or what kind of disgusting conditions they are willing to put up with; but one thing's for sure—five days is a long time to go without TP.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
The Great Fish Fiasco
Dare I start with some background? It will almost certainly lead to blame and retribution. But (as per the unprovoked attacks on my van last week) it seems I have no problems making enemies, or at least inciting a certain contingent (who shall remain nameless, though I know their names) to thoughtlessly attempt to undermine our pride by filling our front door with newspaper and drawing ducks on my van's windows. Perhaps a reminder about the last time someone tried to prank us and the ensuing revenge will give rise to the fear that should be in their hearts of what is coming.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. We were talking about fish. The fiasco started when our four fish (Juan, Miguel, Maria, and Frank) were stolen from our apartment on the evening of Memorial Day. It should be noted that this heartless attack was both unprovoked and undeserved. Upon discovering the identities of the culprits that evening, we hatched our plan.
A week later, at Brandalyn's birthday party, I covertly (though not as much so as I had hoped) removed her keys from her purse and made a copy of them at Home Depot. A quick note here. Many people claim that they "knew" what was going on. Be that as it may, it does not in any way change the fact (and in many ways enhances the coolness of the fact) that we still got in and out undetected a few weeks later.
The plan was set. With the purchase of about 50 goldfish, some fish food, and a few educational pamphlets on how to take care of them, we launched into action. At the prescribed time agent X (a girl who shall remain nameless and is totally unknown to those on whom this prank was . . . uh . . . pranked) entered the apartment on the pretense that she was searching for a new apartment into which to move later in the year. She scoped out her surroundings and gained the most useful information about when the apartment would be vacated.
Returning a few hours later, we discovered, to our dismay, that two people were still in the apartment! Not only had they maliciously lied to agent X, but our goldfish were also dying! Agent Y improvised beautifully, and two minutes later, agent Z (that's me) knocked on the door and enlisted the help of the inhabitants of the Target to return the fish to their proper owners. They were only too glad to help. Meanwhile, agents X and Y entered the apartment and placed the fish in every conceivable water receptacle: water pitchers, pots, pans, the blender, the bathtub, and yes, the kitchen sink.
A quick text message to agent Z, and the inhabitants were returned to the Target with some well placed words of encouragement ("I don't think you'll miss our fish too much; I'm sure you'll find something to occupy your time") and all three agents met at the predetermined rendezvous point. We exulted.
For the time being, my friends, victory is ours. We await your response with much anticipation.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. We were talking about fish. The fiasco started when our four fish (Juan, Miguel, Maria, and Frank) were stolen from our apartment on the evening of Memorial Day. It should be noted that this heartless attack was both unprovoked and undeserved. Upon discovering the identities of the culprits that evening, we hatched our plan.
A week later, at Brandalyn's birthday party, I covertly (though not as much so as I had hoped) removed her keys from her purse and made a copy of them at Home Depot. A quick note here. Many people claim that they "knew" what was going on. Be that as it may, it does not in any way change the fact (and in many ways enhances the coolness of the fact) that we still got in and out undetected a few weeks later.
The plan was set. With the purchase of about 50 goldfish, some fish food, and a few educational pamphlets on how to take care of them, we launched into action. At the prescribed time agent X (a girl who shall remain nameless and is totally unknown to those on whom this prank was . . . uh . . . pranked) entered the apartment on the pretense that she was searching for a new apartment into which to move later in the year. She scoped out her surroundings and gained the most useful information about when the apartment would be vacated.
Returning a few hours later, we discovered, to our dismay, that two people were still in the apartment! Not only had they maliciously lied to agent X, but our goldfish were also dying! Agent Y improvised beautifully, and two minutes later, agent Z (that's me) knocked on the door and enlisted the help of the inhabitants of the Target to return the fish to their proper owners. They were only too glad to help. Meanwhile, agents X and Y entered the apartment and placed the fish in every conceivable water receptacle: water pitchers, pots, pans, the blender, the bathtub, and yes, the kitchen sink.
A quick text message to agent Z, and the inhabitants were returned to the Target with some well placed words of encouragement ("I don't think you'll miss our fish too much; I'm sure you'll find something to occupy your time") and all three agents met at the predetermined rendezvous point. We exulted.
For the time being, my friends, victory is ours. We await your response with much anticipation.
_________________________________________
One fish; twenty fish; gold fish; plenty o' fish:
In the blender:
At least we removed the filter...
The kitchen sink:
Friday, June 19, 2009
The Cookie Lab
Background:
It all started -- innocently enough -- with cookies and milk. Sam eats cookies and milk at least every other day in our apartment and he made an observation that caused not a little angst in our little apartment. He noticed that dunking an Oreo cookie completely under milk made the cookie less soggy than did dunking it only partially.
Naturally, I couldn't accept such a seemingly blatant contradiction of logic and physical propriety, so I challenged him on it. Much to my surprise, the cookies seemed to be, in very fact, soggier when only partially dunked. However, Sam jumped to a conclusion that I wasn't prepared to make. His contention was that the cookie was soggier because it had absorbed more milk. Mine was that one couldn't jump to such a conclusion (sogginess could, possibly, be related to some factor other than milk absorption) unless we had tested the hypothesis with a concrete methodology. Thus, we arrive (with great flourish) at...
The Cookie Lab
Introduction and Hypothesis:
All evidence seeming to indicate that Oreo cookies have a greater propensity to absorb milk while being only partly submerged in the liquid, we propose to test this hypothesis by measuring the percentage increase of mass of an Oreo after its having been either wholly or partially submerged in milk. Our intention is to determine which method affords the best absorptive environment for the cookie. It shall be tested and proven as follows.
Method:
We tested a total of twenty cookies of known individual mass, ten being submerged completely and ten being only partially dunked in the 1% milk. Each cookie was allowed to absorb milk for 30 seconds and then drained through a slotted spoon for 5 additional seconds before being massed again with the same scale. Measurements were accurate to tenths of grams. Please refer to the pictures attached for setup visuals. The most scrupulous care was taken to ensure that effects of human contact were minimized. Gloves were worn by each participant who came into contact with a cookie and the bowl into which the cookies were placed while being weighed was wiped clean between measurements.
The equipment was graciously "provided" by Brigham Young University (albeit without their knowledge) and data were recorded on a spreadsheet and analyzed using the concrete, time-tested methods of statistical analysis.
Data:
The results of our experiment are as follows.
You'll notice, however, several errant data points in the Full Dip method, in which four cookies lost mass after having been soaked in milk for the full thirty seconds. The fact that this anomaly only happened in the Full Dip method is not without import. It is completely within reason to remove these points as unexplainable anomalies associated with the method (extreme cookie crumbling comes to mind as a possible explanation). With these points removed, we present our official data.
Data Analysis:
Our results were shocking.
It seems quite evident that the partial dip method is the most effective for absorbing the maximum amount of milk over a short amount of time. As is quite clearly shown, partial dipping absorbs 16.1% more milk per cookie weight in thirty seconds.
Conclusions:
The results of the lab lead to many more questions that must be answered. For example, we cannot assume that the absorption function in time is totally linear. How much milk would a cookie absorb if each were dipped for one second, or for a minute? Over long periods of time, it seems logical that the full dip method would yield greater efficacy. Further research could be done to determine the shape of the functions as determined by the amount of time a cookie is submerged.
The most pressing question is, of course, what causes a cookie that is less submerged to absorb more milk. One explanation is quite easily illustrated by dunking a cookie in water. When it is fully submerged, the cookie slowly releases air bubbles into the water. Dunking the cookie partially in water for thirty seconds and then fully submerging it yields few to no bubbles. In other words, air leaves the cookie (thereby allowing milk to take its place) faster when it is only partially submerged because of the difference in pressure between the part of the cookie in the milk and the part of it in air. That pressure difference is decidedly less when the cookie is fully emerged, causing air to escape less quickly.
It should also be noted that the sogginess produced when the cookies are partially submerged in milk for thirty seconds renders them almost completely unpalatable.
Acknowledgements:
Many thanks, again, to Brigham Young University for its unwitting participation in our experiment as well as to Maddy, bowl-swabber; Erica, equals-button-pusher-and-paper-towel-getter; Courtlin, milk-pourer; Brandalyn, time-keeper; and all other observers, participants, and supporters of our cause.
It all started -- innocently enough -- with cookies and milk. Sam eats cookies and milk at least every other day in our apartment and he made an observation that caused not a little angst in our little apartment. He noticed that dunking an Oreo cookie completely under milk made the cookie less soggy than did dunking it only partially.
Naturally, I couldn't accept such a seemingly blatant contradiction of logic and physical propriety, so I challenged him on it. Much to my surprise, the cookies seemed to be, in very fact, soggier when only partially dunked. However, Sam jumped to a conclusion that I wasn't prepared to make. His contention was that the cookie was soggier because it had absorbed more milk. Mine was that one couldn't jump to such a conclusion (sogginess could, possibly, be related to some factor other than milk absorption) unless we had tested the hypothesis with a concrete methodology. Thus, we arrive (with great flourish) at...
The Cookie Lab
Introduction and Hypothesis:
All evidence seeming to indicate that Oreo cookies have a greater propensity to absorb milk while being only partly submerged in the liquid, we propose to test this hypothesis by measuring the percentage increase of mass of an Oreo after its having been either wholly or partially submerged in milk. Our intention is to determine which method affords the best absorptive environment for the cookie. It shall be tested and proven as follows.
Method:
We tested a total of twenty cookies of known individual mass, ten being submerged completely and ten being only partially dunked in the 1% milk. Each cookie was allowed to absorb milk for 30 seconds and then drained through a slotted spoon for 5 additional seconds before being massed again with the same scale. Measurements were accurate to tenths of grams. Please refer to the pictures attached for setup visuals. The most scrupulous care was taken to ensure that effects of human contact were minimized. Gloves were worn by each participant who came into contact with a cookie and the bowl into which the cookies were placed while being weighed was wiped clean between measurements.
The Full Dip:
The Partial Dip:
Draining:
Data:
The results of our experiment are as follows.
You'll notice, however, several errant data points in the Full Dip method, in which four cookies lost mass after having been soaked in milk for the full thirty seconds. The fact that this anomaly only happened in the Full Dip method is not without import. It is completely within reason to remove these points as unexplainable anomalies associated with the method (extreme cookie crumbling comes to mind as a possible explanation). With these points removed, we present our official data.
Data Analysis:
Our results were shocking.
It seems quite evident that the partial dip method is the most effective for absorbing the maximum amount of milk over a short amount of time. As is quite clearly shown, partial dipping absorbs 16.1% more milk per cookie weight in thirty seconds.
Conclusions:
The results of the lab lead to many more questions that must be answered. For example, we cannot assume that the absorption function in time is totally linear. How much milk would a cookie absorb if each were dipped for one second, or for a minute? Over long periods of time, it seems logical that the full dip method would yield greater efficacy. Further research could be done to determine the shape of the functions as determined by the amount of time a cookie is submerged.
The most pressing question is, of course, what causes a cookie that is less submerged to absorb more milk. One explanation is quite easily illustrated by dunking a cookie in water. When it is fully submerged, the cookie slowly releases air bubbles into the water. Dunking the cookie partially in water for thirty seconds and then fully submerging it yields few to no bubbles. In other words, air leaves the cookie (thereby allowing milk to take its place) faster when it is only partially submerged because of the difference in pressure between the part of the cookie in the milk and the part of it in air. That pressure difference is decidedly less when the cookie is fully emerged, causing air to escape less quickly.
It should also be noted that the sogginess produced when the cookies are partially submerged in milk for thirty seconds renders them almost completely unpalatable.
Acknowledgements:
Many thanks, again, to Brigham Young University for its unwitting participation in our experiment as well as to Maddy, bowl-swabber; Erica, equals-button-pusher-and-paper-towel-getter; Courtlin, milk-pourer; Brandalyn, time-keeper; and all other observers, participants, and supporters of our cause.
Beginning
Welcome to Chuckleslovakia!
We've known for quite some time that we're completely ridiculous. However, the realization that we could be more publicly so initiated a chain of events that leads us to this: online proof that we do have -- indeed -- far too much time and far too little regard for our collective dignity.
Without further ado, please continue on to read up on our (mis)adventures.
Daniel
We've known for quite some time that we're completely ridiculous. However, the realization that we could be more publicly so initiated a chain of events that leads us to this: online proof that we do have -- indeed -- far too much time and far too little regard for our collective dignity.
Without further ado, please continue on to read up on our (mis)adventures.
Daniel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)