55 gallon drum of mm's...

[IGBT]

Text




Chocolate Obsession Leads to Physics Discovery
Fri 13 February, 2004 23:11

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Princeton physicist Paul Chaikin's passion for M&M candies was so well known that his students played a sweet practical joke on him by leaving a 55-gallon drum of the candies in his office.

Little did they know that their prank would lead to a physics breakthrough.

The barrel full of the oblate little candies made Chaikin think about how well they packed in. A series of studies have shown they pack more tightly than perfect spheres -- something that surprises many physicists and Chaikin himself.

"It is a startling and wonderful result," said Sidney Nagel, a physicist at the University of Chicago. "One doesn't normally stop to think about this. If you did, you might have guessed what would happen, but you'd have guessed wrongly."

 

[guyver01]

mmmm... M&Ms .

 

[conjur]

<--- likes the red ones

 

[StageLeft]

How the hell much money did they spend on that?

Mars Inc., which makes M&Ms, did not help sponsor the research although it donated 125 pounds of almond M&Ms to Chaikin, Princeton said in a statement.

Ah

 

[thraxes]

food for thought eh?

<= Loves M&Ms

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

mmm...crack....er, um, M&Ms...

 

[Yzzim]

I just went to the fridge and got some m&m's when I saw this thread.

they are black and white ones

 

[WinkOsmosis]

That's why those bags have so much empty space in them.

 

[jurzdevil]

BRING BACK THE TAN ONES!!!!!!!

 

[akodi]

the tan ones look like butt nuggets.

 

[gsaldivar]

Originally posted by: akodi
the tan ones look like butt nuggets.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Yzzim
I just went to the fridge and got some m&m's when I saw this thread.

they are black and white ones

yeah i bought a bag the other day. they were black and white! the man is keeping down the colors man! free the colors! free the colors!

 

[ThePresence]

Why isi ti a breakthrough that they pack tighter than perfect spheres? Of course they do. Perfect spheres have more space between them. I'm probably just not getting it...

 

[EvilYoda]

Now you see, it's 125 pounds of ALMOND M&Ms that they donated...that would make me quit the project right there

But that's pretty damn cool...I wonder if the students will get a reference in the paper

 

[blakeatwork]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
How the hell much money did they spend on that?

Mars Inc., which makes M&Ms, did not help sponsor the research although it donated 125 pounds of almond M&Ms to Chaikin, Princeton said in a statement.

Ah

Ahhhhhuhuhuhuh.... Sweet sweet almod goodness.... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Why isi ti a breakthrough that they pack tighter than perfect spheres? Of course they do. Perfect spheres have more space between them. I'm probably just not getting it...

Can you prove it mathematically? I bet the answer is probably no, and that's why it's a breakthrough. Just because your intuition tells you that they should pack tighter doesn't mean that you're correct; you have to give a correct explanation as to why this works.

 

[ski2slow]

I wonder how much M&M is in the 55 gallon drum. Cool practical joke too.

 

[Ness]

I wanted pics

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Why isi ti a breakthrough that they pack tighter than perfect spheres? Of course they do. Perfect spheres have more space between them. I'm probably just not getting it...

Can you prove it mathematically? I bet the answer is probably no, and that's why it's a breakthrough. Just because your intuition tells you that they should pack tighter doesn't mean that you're correct; you have to give a correct explanation as to why this works.

Well I can explain it in words, but not in a mathematical formula.

 

[tk149]

Green ones make you horny.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Why isi ti a breakthrough that they pack tighter than perfect spheres? Of course they do. Perfect spheres have more space between them. I'm probably just not getting it...

Can you prove it mathematically? I bet the answer is probably no, and that's why it's a breakthrough. Just because your intuition tells you that they should pack tighter doesn't mean that you're correct; you have to give a correct explanation as to why this works.

Well I can explain it in words, but not in a mathematical formula.

Assuming the he volume of the spheres is equal, they have the same Radius throughout. The eliptical nature of M&M's, which I will call "chemical X" allows for varying radial measurments as verticaillity is reached.

Non-BS answer: They are longer when their faces are facing East and West, and therefore the size of the pockets of psace between Chemical X to Chemical X particles vary, many times forming possibly smaller pockets..ie more chemical X

 

[Goosemaster]

By the way, the frowns on the students faces when they walk into class the next time will be priceless.

If I were the prof, I would be waiting with a disposible camera and say:

Say "cheese" MuddafXXkers!

DD

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Why isi ti a breakthrough that they pack tighter than perfect spheres? Of course they do. Perfect spheres have more space between them. I'm probably just not getting it...

Can you prove it mathematically? I bet the answer is probably no, and that's why it's a breakthrough. Just because your intuition tells you that they should pack tighter doesn't mean that you're correct; you have to give a correct explanation as to why this works.

Well I can explain it in words, but not in a mathematical formula.

Assuming the he volume of the spheres is equal, they have the same Radius throughout. The eliptical nature of M&M's, which I will call "chemical X" allows for varying radial measurments as verticaillity is reached.

Non-BS answer: They are longer when their faces are facing East and West, and therefore the size of the pockets of psace between Chemical X to Chemical X particles vary, many times forming possibly smaller pockets..ie more chemical X

Neither of those are mathematical proofs, they're you speaking out of your ass. A mathematical proof would likely use points of tangency and complex math since ellipsoids are, in general, a pain in the ass to work with.

ThePresence, I believe you when you say that you have an intuitive understanding and that you can explain it with words but in the scientific community that counts for squat. If you want to show that your hypothesis is true you have to show a rigid mathematical proof of why it is correct. It may sound pointless but it greatly reduces the chances of someone claiming something is correct when it isn't.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Why isi ti a breakthrough that they pack tighter than perfect spheres? Of course they do. Perfect spheres have more space between them. I'm probably just not getting it...

Can you prove it mathematically? I bet the answer is probably no, and that's why it's a breakthrough. Just because your intuition tells you that they should pack tighter doesn't mean that you're correct; you have to give a correct explanation as to why this works.

Well I can explain it in words, but not in a mathematical formula.

Assuming the he volume of the spheres is equal, they have the same Radius throughout. The eliptical nature of M&M's, which I will call "chemical X" allows for varying radial measurments as verticaillity is reached.

Non-BS answer: They are longer when their faces are facing East and West, and therefore the size of the pockets of psace between Chemical X to Chemical X particles vary, many times forming possibly smaller pockets..ie more chemical X

Neither of those are mathematical proofs, they're you speaking out of your ass. A mathematical proof would likely use points of tangency and complex math since ellipsoids are, in general, a pain in the ass to work with.

ThePresence, I believe you when you say that you have an intuitive understanding and that you can explain it with words but in the scientific community that counts for squat. If you want to show that your hypothesis is true you have to show a rigid mathematical proof of why it is correct. It may sound pointless but it greatly reduces the chances of someone claiming something is correct when it isn't.

Exactly. I was speaking out of my ass.

Seriously though, one would have to delve into the dynamics of elipsical solids, right? Such as the dynamics of a gas and of water, where they work to filll the volume they are in to certain degrees, except addressing the characteristics, or PROBABILTY of how the solids would rest in such a complicated situation(thousands of small soilds in a 55 gallon drum)

Just you wait, one day there will be a M&M differential equation to explain this all.

 

the story that runs next week will explain how it wasn't a practical joke

instead half of the m&ms were coated with rat poison