h a l f b a k e r yThunk.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
While out of my depth, trying to decide whether this was bad science or not, I stumbled on this extract from William Gilbert's 1600 treatise on magnetism: |
|
| |
"[...] why fhould I, I fay, add aught further to this fo-perturbed republick of letters, and expofe this noble philofophy, which feems new and incredible by reafon of fo many things hitherto unrevealed, to be damned and torn to pieces by the maledictions of thofe who are either already fworn to the opinions of other men, or are foolifh corruptors of good arts, learned idiots, grammatifts, fophifts, wranglers and perverfe little folk ?" |
|
| |
Just wanted to share that. |
|
| |
I don't know if it's bad science either but since I have 'magnetic dilatant' on my unposted/need to research ideas sheet, I have to (+) this. |
|
| |
//fophifts// made me chuckle. |
|
| |
{fings perverfe little folk fong} |
|
| |
pretty sure electric-custard clutches exist |
|
| |
what is that thing anyways?: ƒ |
|
| |
It's an S from before people learned how to write properly.
As in "Where the bee ƒucks, there ƒuck I." |
|
| |
Magneto rheological dampers exist, but don't posess the inverse rheological behaviour of custard. |
|
| |
The elongated ƒ originated from stone masons, who found it very difficult to carve an S. |
|
| |
Did you engrave glass with a mallet and chisel? |
|
| |
Rhetorical custard is not intended to be actually eaten, it's the concept that's important. |
|
| |