Radioactive sandwiches and the laws of physics
by Mary - December 11, 2006 - 4:25 PM

photo_15_image.jpgAs a science writer, I occasionally get random unsolicited pitches, announcements, and deep thoughts from scientists and science buffs. Most of the time they’re either irrelevant or slightly touched by insanity, but I do try to read them. So this email, which just appeared in my inbox, seemed to be one of those at first:

Physics is often said to be the “fundamental science” (chemistry is sometimes included), because each of the other sciences (biology, chemistry, geology, material science, engineering, medicine etc.) deals with particular types of material systems that obey the laws of physics. For example, chemistry is the science of matter (such as atoms) and the chemical substances that they form in the bulk. …
So far, so good.

… When another inexorably radioactive sandwich is hardly proverbial, a ridiculously gentle warranty barely takes a peek at another salad dressing around the chess board. …
Now, physicists are a weird bunch; I don’t always understand what they’re talking about, so maybe the salad dressing playing chess is some kind of metaphor for string theory that I’m not getting? And Radioactive Sandwich is in fact a band.

… Discoveries in physics find applications throughout the other natural sciences as they regard the basic constituents of the Universe. …
So true, so true.

… Any earring can take a peek at a muddy wedding dress, but it takes a real inferiority complex to laugh and drink all night with a hockey player around a short order cook.

I give up. Freakin’ spammers.

Click here to get a Risk-Free issue of mental_floss magazine
Comments (5)
  1. As someone who just finished an undergrad physics class (I took the final today!) I am utterly confused…

  2. Hmmm, I wonder what will come up if you put a sensible scientific publictaion through babelfish (or a similar translation program). The result could be similar to the email you received, or so I think.

  3. It’s a helluva science, putting words together so they’ll pique the interest enough to open the spam email and appear as a unique passage that will allow the spammer to stake the claim.

    As if there’s not already enough babble out there, we now have economic incentive to add to the mess. As Mel Brooks would say, Whatta woild.

  4. The ones that bug me are the ones that look like real email sent to a wrong address. I tried to be nice and let the sender know they got the address wrong, and *wham!* I’m flooded with eBay tutorials and sexy singles that want to meet me.

  5. That looks an awful lot like the babel function on Quark to me

Comment

commenting policy