Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat

That Eureka moment.

<< < (2/2)

AndyN:
We have now tried this with two non blood related cats for added accuracy, one male , one female.

As a result we have discovered the theory is 50% true. The first cat hovered for 2-3 minutes perfectly controlling height with its tail and  direction byt turning its head...... before landing perfectly and eating the toast followed by the snake behind it (damn tough cat!)


The second cat seemed to struggle from the outset and crash landed at speed into the patio, not landing on its feet either.


so 50% true by my workings.

woody:

--- Quote from: Disco Matt on October 22, 2008, 18:32:20 ---Previous research involving attaching the toast to the back of the cat with the butter side up was something of a failure, as the cat merely rotated at considerable speed about 2ft off the ground. This resulted in centrifugal force distributing butter over a wide area until the cord broke, leaving the experimenters with a very angry cat and butter everywhere.



--- End quote ---

WOW if we could attach the cat to the transmission of a land rover
we could have our fist carbon neutral land rover and free road tax

as long as the cat doesn't
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
 fart

merlin617:

--- Quote from: AndyN on October 22, 2008, 21:00:23 ---We have now tried this with two non blood related cats for added accuracy, one male , one female.

As a result we have discovered the theory is 50% true. The first cat hovered for 2-3 minutes perfectly controlling height with its tail and  direction byt turning its head...... before landing perfectly and eating the toast followed by the snake behind it (damn tough cat!)


The second cat seemed to struggle from the outset and crash landed at speed into the patio, not landing on its feet either.


so 50% true by my workings.

--- End quote ---

Your initial results are very promising, particularly the first test subject which appears to have performed unsurprisingly as I predicted although I am slightly concerned by the appearance of a snake! Perhaps some as yet unknown phenomena has occurred opening some sort of portal which allowed the reptile to pass through.
More concerning is the apparent failure of your second experiment. As my hypothesis is obviously correct I can only assume that human error in the attachment of the toast occurred. Perhaps you or one of your technicians attached a piece butter side up. As I made abundantly clear in my original paper and reiterate here, attachment of the toast is critical. It is also possible that some sort of magnetic anomaly caused by the inadvertent use of a hairdryer or tv set may have affected your results and caused the cat to crash. We must however try to put this early setback behind us and concentrate on the positive results you have so far achieved. Obviously we are pushing at the boundaries of science and failure is part of the learning process. Take heart and press on with this valuable work.  :-. 

Discopoo:

--- Quote from: merlin617 on October 23, 2008, 08:38:51 ---
--- Quote from: AndyN on October 22, 2008, 21:00:23 ---We have now tried this with two non blood related cats for added accuracy, one male , one female.

As a result we have discovered the theory is 50% true. The first cat hovered for 2-3 minutes perfectly controlling height with its tail and  direction byt turning its head...... before landing perfectly and eating the toast followed by the snake behind it (damn tough cat!)


The second cat seemed to struggle from the outset and crash landed at speed into the patio, not landing on its feet either.


so 50% true by my workings.

--- End quote ---

Your initial results are very promising, particularly the first test subject which appears to have performed unsurprisingly as I predicted although I am slightly concerned by the appearance of a snake! Perhaps some as yet unknown phenomena has occurred opening some sort of portal which allowed the reptile to pass through.
More concerning is the apparent failure of your second experiment. As my hypothesis is obviously correct I can only assume that human error in the attachment of the toast occurred. Perhaps you or one of your technicians attached a piece butter side up. As I made abundantly clear in my original paper and reiterate here, attachment of the toast is critical. It is also possible that some sort of magnetic anomaly caused by the inadvertent use of a hairdryer or tv set may have affected your results and caused the cat to crash. We must however try to put this early setback behind us and concentrate on the positive results you have so far achieved. Obviously we are pushing at the boundaries of science and failure is part of the learning process. Take heart and press on with this valuable work.  :-. 


--- End quote ---

If the Second cat was male and had previously been nutered, the inbalance as a result caused by less weight at the rear end may have contibuted to the result ?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page