Explaining the Inertia of Laundry: Why is it so Difficult to Get Started?

[zoobyshoe]

Someone recently remarked to me: "A pile of dirty clothes at rest, tends to stay at rest. And stay dirty."

And it occurred to me that the inertia of laundry is far in excess of it's mass: it is really vastly more difficult to get a pile of laundry into motion than you would expect from dividing its weight by the local gravity anywhere.

Can anyone explain why laundry is so much more inert than any comparable mass?

-Zooby

 

[jimmy p]

Maybe because the gas cloud around it is inert.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't follow. Are you saying its a cloud of inert gas? Or just an inert gas cloud?

 

[jimmy p]

i dunno, i was just punning the word. The second one seems more likely though.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I think you misunderstood. What I said was "Who's on first?"

 

[hypnagogue]

Can anyone explain why laundry is so much more inert than any comparable mass?

Dirty laundry inordinately warps motivative spacetime. You should take care of whatever laundry you have now, while you can, lest it form an event horizon from which nothing, not even putrid odors, can escape.

 

[jimmy p]

I think you misunderstood. What I said was "Who's on first?"

? I'm lost!

 

[Artman]

Dirty laundry inordinately warps motivative spacetime. You should take care of whatever laundry you have now, while you can, lest it form an event horizon from which nothing, not even putrid odors, can escape.

Finally, I see a possible explanation for the single sock laying along side the road. The sock slips past the event horizon and is sent into another dimension reappearing along side the road. (Oddly a week before it disappears in the first place).

 

[hypnagogue]

Finally, I see a possible explanation for the single sock laying along side the road. The sock slips past the event horizon and is sent into another dimension reappearing along side the road. (Oddly a week before it disappears in the first place).

A competing hypothesis states that the rapid 'unwarping' or flattening of a condensate of laundry effected by a thorough cleansing in a washing machine creates a sort of nonlocal quantum 'slingshot' effect through spacetime. I favor this hypothesis since it has the power to explain not only single socks found lying along the side of the road, but also single socks mysteriously missing from laundry washes.

 

[Tsu]

A competing hypothesis states that the rapid 'unwarping' or flattening of a condensate of laundry effected by a thorough cleansing in a washing machine creates a sort of nonlocal quantum 'slingshot' effect through spacetime. I favor this hypothesis since it has the power to explain not only single socks found lying along the side of the road, but also single socks mysteriously missing from laundry washes.

Does this unwarping cause the sock to change color or pattern?

 

[hypnagogue]

Does this unwarping cause the sock to change color or pattern?

Yes, and this for instance is what accounts for the previously myseterious "white clothing tinted pink" phenomenon.

 

[zoobyshoe]

A competing hypothesis states that the rapid 'unwarping' or flattening of a condensate of laundry effected by a thorough cleansing in a washing machine creates a sort of nonlocal quantum 'slingshot' effect through spacetime. I favor this hypothesis since it has the power to explain not only single socks found lying along the side of the road, but also single socks mysteriously missing from laundry washes.

Well, this is some pretty speculation, but I'm afraid if you hold to it you will find yourself in contradiction to Einstein. Once someone mentioned to Professor Einstein that he wasn't wearing any socks. Thinking deeply on the problem, Einstein gave his pronouncement: "I guess that means socks aren't very important, then."

Attempts to explain the inertia of laundry by reference to socks is, therefore, obviously, in clear violation of Special and General Relativity.

 

[hypnagogue]

Well, this is some pretty speculation, but I'm afraid if you hold to it you will find yourself in contradiction to Einstein. Once someone mentioned to Professor Einstein that he wasn't wearing any socks. Thinking deeply on the problem, Einstein gave his pronouncement: "I guess that means socks aren't very important, then."

Attempts to explain the inertia of laundry by reference to socks is, therefore, obviously, in clear violation of Special and General Relativity.

Einstein's protestations to the contrary, J.S. Bell has rigorously shown that nonlocal laundry effects cannot be written off to such 'hidden socks' theories. Assuming hidden socks in laundry theory inevitably leads to logical contradiction.

Still, given the elegance and usefulness of Einstein's theory, we cannot reject it out of hand. Contemporary theorists are thus pooling their efforts in order to devise a 'Theory that Indubitably Describes Everything,' or 'TIDE' for short, that can accommodate small scale laundry effects, such as the nonlocal sock phenomenon, within a larger framework of huge conglomerations of laundry as described by Einstein.

 

[BoulderHead]

If it's a small load I prefer doing it by hand.

"A pile of dirty clothes at rest, tends to stay at rest. And stay dirty."

I dunno, sometimes I think they get even dirtier while sitting there (I run more experiments).

 

[Imparcticle]

What would Heisenberg say?

Well, you see, the "missing sock" anomaly is a product of the undeterminancy principle. We know the sock is missing, but we don't know where it is; rather, we could only speculate where it is.

or...Schrödinger's Sock [Cat]

The sock is not missing and it is missing. It is all a matter of superpositoning of socks.

Hypnagogue: I love the TIDE acronym. Good one.




if what I wrote didn't make sense, I should point out that I have no sense of humor when it comes to applying physics to missing socks.

 

[Artman]

Another interesting phenomenon of laundry, (in particular clean laundry, especially socks) is their high levels of static electricity. Perhaps the inordinately high amounts of laundry inertia can be due in part to electro-magnetic attraction? There is evidence to support this conjecture: for instance, high levels of energy found in children's and teenager bedrooms in every aspect except laundry. Now, the laundry may actually have to give up electrons to the energy field developed within the space causing a negative condition to exist within the laundry itself. Attracting more and more dirty laundry to be dropped almost straight where removed from the person. This powerful electro-magnetic attraction may, in fact, be the only thing stopping the bulk of the laundry from passing into black holes.

Please refrain from entering this verbatum in the "Most absurd TD Claim" thread.

 

[Njorl]

I don't agree with the line of this thread at all. I have observed dirty laundry at rest spontaneously move. Of course, I have camel crickets in my basement, so that might have something to do with it.

One thing I will stress though, the crickets never actually did the laundry. Not only did it not get clean, I believe it became more dirty.

Njorl

 

[Artman]

One thing I will stress though, the crickets never actually did the laundry. Not only did it not get clean, I believe it became more dirty.

Njorl

Camel cricket dung. (Not a comment on your theory, just a possible reason why the clothes are more dirty.)

 

[Tsu]

Does this unwarping cause the sock to change color or pattern?

Yes, and this for instance is what accounts for the previously myseterious "white clothing tinted pink" phenomenon.

IVAN! Now I know how your sock went from white tube to brown argyle! :surprise:

if what I wrote didn't make sense, I should point out that I have no sense of humor when it comes to applying physics to missing socks.

I have no sense of humor when it comes to missing (and found on the roadside) socks OR unwarped socks.

I have observed dirty laundry at rest spontaneously move. Of course, I have camel crickets in my basement, so that might have something to do with it.

I've observed this same phenomenon! However I don't have a basement with camel crickets. I do, however, have dust rhinos under my bed. I'm trying to train them to actually move the laundry across the house and into the laundry room. It's slow going. And, unfortunately, dust rhino dung is a much larger problem than camel cricket dung.

 

[zoobyshoe]

If it's a small load I prefer doing it by hand.


I dunno, sometimes I think they get even dirtier while sitting there (I run more experiments).

Where the hell have you been?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Still, given the elegance and usefulness of Einstein's theory, we cannot reject it out of hand. Contemporary theorists are thus pooling their efforts in order to devise a 'Theory that Indubitably Describes Everything,' or 'TIDE' for short, that can accommodate small scale laundry effects, such as the nonlocal sock phenomenon, within a larger framework of huge conglomerations of laundry as described by Einstein.

If I had been looking for this kind of TIDE speculation, I would have posted my quetion up in the Kaku forum. There must be hard, Newtonian ansers to this apparent mismatch of inertia and mass, aren't there? Resonant counter-laudromotive equal and opposite mexican standoff waves, or something.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Another interesting phenomenon of laundry, (in particular clean laundry, especially socks) is their high levels of static electricity...

...Attracting more and more dirty laundry to be dropped almost straight where removed from the person.

You are confusing clean laundry and dirty laundry. Piles of clean laundry are very much less inert than dirty. Piles of clean laundry, particularly socks and underwear, tend to shrink by themselves over time and can sometimes completely disappear. Dirty laundry never undergoes this kind of spontaneous remission.

 

[selfAdjoint]

There is a lifeform. Its larval form looks like a sock, and its imago looks like a hanger. Thus socks tend to disappear and hangers proliferate in your closet.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't agree with the line of this thread at all. I have observed dirty laundry at rest spontaneously move. Of course, I have camel crickets in my basement, so that might have something to do with it.

I don't buy this. The notion that if you wear a sock long enough it will take on a life of its own is an old wives tale. I once wore a pair of socks for 1 year, seven months, ten days. When removed, something like complete rigor mortis set in; a rigidification into an amazingly hard substance that was able to deflect small caliber bullets.

 

[zoobyshoe]

There is a lifeform. Its larval form looks like a sock, and its imago looks like a hanger. Thus socks tend to disappear and hangers proliferate in your closet.

My god, you're a genius! I would never have seen the connection between the two!

 

[BoulderHead]

Where the hell have you been?

Laying on my back, mostly.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Laying on my back, mostly.

Did you mistake yourself for a pile of laundry?

 

[BoulderHead]

Did you mistake yourself for a pile of laundry?

Well, for a good while I figured I might be washed up, if that's what you mean.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Well, for a good while I figured I might be washed up, if that's what you mean.

That's what all the Boulderheads on Easter Island used to think. Now they're more popular than ever. Good to see you back.

 

[BoulderHead]

Haha, Thank you Zoobyshoe!