Quantum jam
Quantum effects are rare in the macroscopic world. Things, if you鈥檒l pardon the technical language, tend to be one thing or another, but seldom both at the same time. Otherwise you might wind up with logical inconsistencies, such as, to pick a random example, a national lockdown that people feel free to violate.
Another such mind-bender comes courtesy of retailer Marks & Spencer. 鈥淲hat comes first 鈥� jam or cream?鈥� it asked in a tweet featuring a selection of summery scones. 鈥淣ow you don鈥檛 have to choose thanks to our new strawberry-flavoured clotted cream.鈥�
Undisturbed superposition of this kind is a beautiful thing to behold, but the true enormity of this product launch does not lie therein. At a time when people are more divided than ever, it is extremely moving to see something that anyone, regardless of age or background, can wrinkle their nose up at in disgust.
Advertisement
Fake the jewels
It is never particularly dignified to admit to an attack of schadenfreude. This is why Feedback will, instead, insist that we take absolutely no joy from the misfortune we are about to relate.
According to an article in The Times, a group of armed robbers hijacked a van carrying 拢500,000 worth of jewellery, . The criminals allegedly had inside information, which is why they struck when the van was so richly laden.
The only flaw in their cunning, devilishly well-executed plan is that their haul consisted entirely of costume jewellery, with the real swag left behind.
Two feet apart
continues to be top of Feedback鈥檚 mind, as does the proliferation of unusual techniques designed to ensure people remain the statutory distance apart.
The latest such innovation comes from the town of Cluj in Romania, where a cobbler has designed shoes so elongated that they make physical proximity practically impossible.
The prolonged pandemic pumps, so Reuters informs us, come in the equivalent of a European size 75, and need almost 1 square metre of material to produce. The effect is, perhaps, more vaudeville clown than hygiene-minded dandy, but given Feedback鈥檚 own wardrobe choices, who are we to disapprove.
Far, far away
On the subject of social distancing, thank you to Barney Herring for pointing out that 鈥渟afe social spacing is best maintained at a distance of 65 attoparsecs鈥�.
This distance is alternatively expressed as 20 giga-angstroms, around 13 pico-astronomical units or 10鹿鹿 yotta-Planck lengths.
Let them equate
Time now for a story of unusually pronounced whimsy that begins with cartoonist Tom Gauld, whose regular contributions to New Scientist are among the highlights of any reader experience. Some weeks back, he used his cartoon to draw parallels between the detailed stratigraphic layers of, well, stratigraphic layers and those of elaborate biscuit-based desserts.
This prompted one particularly talented reader to actually , consisting of 鈥� and we report this with difficulty while salivating 鈥� raspberry coulis, chocolate ganache, blackberry chocolate mousse and coffee sugar syrup.
No free samples made their way to Feedback, alas, but given our chronic pandemic overeating, that is probably just as well.
As we and our colleagues united around the virtual water cooler to rhapsodise about these baked geological teaching aids, a source pointed us in the direction of yet more appetising scientific cakery.
It appears that the Nanophotonics Centre at the University of Cambridge mandates adherence to a mathematical identity that, as it appears , runs as follows: 鈥淧ublication=cake.鈥� Directly below this equation is a quasi-infinite scroll of scientifically accurate confectionery, ranging from optically nano-welding brownies to photocatalytic shortbread.
Let us know if you are aware of any other inhabitants of this viennoiserie Venn diagram.
Slice up the pi
In a recent column (30 May), Feedback cast an approving eye over a deliberately inefficient scheme to calculate the value of pi. This inspired George Masin to write in with the following observation: 鈥淚f asked to give the value of pi in a space allowing only 7 characters, you would probably give 3.14159, but a slightly more accurate value can be given by specifying the division 355/113.鈥�
Throwing down the gauntlet to fellow pificionados, he goes on to ask: 鈥淎re there cases where a division using more characters gives pi to a greater accuracy than the number of characters used to represent the division?鈥� Please send your suggestions to the usual address.
What鈥檚 in a name?
Oh go on, have another helping of nominative determinism why don鈥檛 you, we all know it鈥檚 why you are here. Gather round and say hello to New York ICU doctor Rob Gore and ecological consultant Laurie Wildwood.
Got a story for Feedback?
You can send stories to Feedback by email at feedback@newscientist.com. Please include your home address. This week鈥檚 and past Feedbacks can be seen on our website.