Teaspoon theory as an explanation for dark matter?

**Curtana** · May 19, 2007, 10:45 AM

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/331/7531/1498
Read before posting

Teaspoon theory as an explanation for dark matter?
Do Teaspoons go off with odd socks OR is this evidence of the dualistic nature of matter? Could teaspoons, paperclips, odd socks, biros, pencil sharpeners all in fact be different aspects of THE SAME thing? Could disappearing teaspoons, in whatever aspect of their being, be the dark matter we are looking for?

**Shaftoe** · May 27, 2007, 06:54 PM

Interesting thought, but I propose that the teaspoons are actually being "summoned" ,if you will, through the quantum foam via a mysterious miniaturization process by highly advanced humans living in a far older, more advanced parallel universe where humans have tragically lost the ability to make teaspoons, paperclips, or socks.

**Gary88** · May 27, 2007, 08:09 PM

yeah, i couldnt be arsed to read past the first few lines because it sounded like utter bollocks to me. is your question about dark matter serious?

**Curtana** · May 28, 2007, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by Gary88

yeah, i couldnt be arsed to read past the first few lines because it sounded like utter bollocks to me. is your question about dark matter serious?

I think I posted this just after the wheel was invented. Definitely before pole dancing was invented, anyway. It is dry scientific humour. I'm not sure if it had a point.

At the bottom of that paper is a link to another much more believable theory:

When I finish doing the washing up I check the bottom of the bowl to make sure it is empty. Then I empty it into the sink. A statistically significant proportion of the time a teaspoon appears in the sink despite not having been in the bowl. At the bottom of the cutlery draw there's often little bits of food. I clean it out occasionally but the bits of food always return.
Conclusion: Teaspoons 'spontaneously generate' from little bits of food in the washing up bowl. I place them in the cutlery drawer. There are already teaspoons in the cutlery draw so the 'teaspoon equilibrium' point is surpassed. Thus the teaspoons are forced to return to their other state – little bits of food.

I have been studying this phenomenon with interest for several days and am planning to deploy a battery of chi squared tests in a month or so. Additional data sources to mine would be appreciated. Please give generously.

**Noble Savage** · May 28, 2007, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by Curtana

I think I posted this just after the wheel was invented. Definitely before pole dancing was invented, anyway. It is dry scientific humour. I'm not sure if it had a point.

At the bottom of that paper is a link to another much more believable theory:

When I finish doing the washing up I check the bottom of the bowl to make sure it is empty. Then I empty it into the sink. A statistically significant proportion of the time a teaspoon appears in the sink despite not having been in the bowl. At the bottom of the cutlery draw there's often little bits of food. I clean it out occasionally but the bits of food always return.
Conclusion: Teaspoons 'spontaneously generate' from little bits of food in the washing up bowl. I place them in the cutlery drawer. There are already teaspoons in the cutlery draw so the 'teaspoon equilibrium' point is surpassed. Thus the teaspoons are forced to return to their other state – little bits of food.

I have been studying this phenomenon with interest for several days and am planning to deploy a battery of chi squared tests in a month or so. Additional data sources to mine would be appreciated. Please give generously.

I love this thoery ,Its so mad its gotta be true

**Chaigidel** · May 27, 2007, 08:30 PM

I really like shaftoe's theory and pronounce it officially sound.

I approve :o

**sgtgoody** · May 28, 2007, 11:36 AM

I think there are things that are more susceptable to the Uncertainty Principle. While it may be a near impossibility for, say, a super model to suddenly appear in your bedroom there is a significantly large chance that a sock or spoon will suddenly appear or dissappear. I believe it is because it is because these things are usually not noticed and so they get to decide for themselves what property they will display at any one time. Often they choose velocity rather than location. The result is that they go hurtling off through time/space without our permission. Objects that we notice all the time tend to be stuck with location and are unable to manifest velocity.