Heisenberg's uncertainty principle says that there is a fundamental limit to the accuracy with which you can know the location and momentum of any object. If you know the location of an object very accurately then your knowledge of its exact momentum will become vaguer, and vice versa. Thus, this is a device to help you find lost things in your house. The problem essentially is that you know the object is perfectly stationary somewhere in your house and this implies that your knowledge of its location must be unclear.

The house is built on a pad which moves your entire house violently from side to side, providing all the objects therein with random and unpredictable momentum. This rapid rise in the uncertainty with which you know the momentum of the lost object must correspondingly cause an increase in the certainty with which you know its location. If you don't find the object immediately, just turn up the 'violent movement' dial a bit more.
-- hippo, Aug 14 2012

House Agitator http://www.youtube....watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE
...bunworthy... [+] [Grogster, Aug 15 2012]

I keep reading this as House Aligator... if I stood in the house, would my uncertainty not actually increase as I was subjected to the same effect?
-- xenzag, Aug 14 2012


//the location and momentum of any object//

Nice try, hippo.
-- DrBob, Aug 14 2012


and I thought this was 8th of 7's nomination for the Big Brother house...
-- not_morrison_rm, Aug 14 2012


To some extent, this Idea is exactly correct. If you know the sort of sound the desired object makes, when it hits something solid, then finding it should become as simple as listening for it. Of course, you have to be able to ignore the impact-sounds of all the other loose objects in the house.... Perhaps, before activating the House Agitator, make sure everything loose, that you encountered in your original search, is tied down.
-- Vernon, Aug 14 2012


Alternatively, a simple way of finding lost objects is to move the rest of the house approximately one house-width to the left. The remaining object will be what you're looking for.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, Aug 14 2012


Just toss everything that is not the object you're looking for, and keep what's left.
-- RayfordSteele, Aug 14 2012


Create a semi-permeable membrane that lets everything but what you're searching for pass through.

Or,

Construct a Peano curve that represents every point in your home with the lost object included. Now, construct a curve of the object. Filter the home curve by the object curve.

Or,

Drive your car into your living room. The object that you are searching for will naturally be attracted to the center of the vehicle beneath its wheels.
-- RayfordSteele, Aug 14 2012


Or, as long as we're using quantum physics, you can apply the Many-Worlds theory to always find the object you're looking for immediately. Simply divide your house into one cubic inch partitions, and use a quantum process to choose one of them at random to search. If the object isn't there, destroy the universe.

(Adapted from a similar sorting algorithm. Be sure that the object is actually in your house, or the results could be disastrous.)
-- ytk, Aug 14 2012


As soon as the agitation has stopped you will know where the object is, with certainty... it will be on the floor (assuming you returned the house to a condition where the floor was the lowermost surface of the house, post-agitation).
-- UnaBubba, Aug 16 2012


//finding keys//

haw! That'd further divide the world(s) into types of people: the people that can't resist raiding their doppelganger's premises for stuff, and those that can.
-- FlyingToaster, Aug 16 2012


Housenberg's uncertainty principle.
-- Phrontistery, Aug 16 2012


//This rapid rise in the uncertainty with which you know the momentum of the lost object must correspondingly cause an increase in the certainty with which you know its location.//
That's wrong. The uncertainty relation is an upper bound, not an equality.
-- sqeaketh the wheel, Aug 16 2012


Come on, [squeaketh] - do you really expect my ideas not to have *any* fundamental logical flaws?
-- hippo, Aug 16 2012


[hippo], I don't mind flaws. I just like knowing what they are.
-- sqeaketh the wheel, Aug 16 2012


//I don't mind flaws. I just like knowing what they are.//

In the ointment?
-- AusCan531, Aug 16 2012


Better there than in the soup ...
-- 8th of 7, Aug 16 2012


Fair enough... you'll find the object on the flaw.
-- UnaBubba, Aug 16 2012


..along with yer fundament.
-- gnomethang, Aug 16 2012


Waiter, there's a flaw in my soup.
-- sqeaketh the wheel, Aug 17 2012


I'm married to one.
-- nuclear hobo, Aug 19 2012



random, halfbakery