# The Inertia Of Laundry

1. May 19, 2004

### zoobyshoe

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

And it occured 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

2. May 19, 2004

### jimmy p

Maybe because the gas cloud around it is inert.

3. May 19, 2004

### zoobyshoe

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

4. May 19, 2004

### jimmy p

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

5. May 19, 2004

### zoobyshoe

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

6. May 20, 2004

### hypnagogue

Staff Emeritus
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.

7. May 20, 2004

### jimmy p

????????????? I'm lost!

8. May 20, 2004

### Artman

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). :rofl:

9. May 20, 2004

### hypnagogue

Staff Emeritus
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.

10. May 20, 2004

### Tsu

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

11. May 20, 2004

### hypnagogue

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

12. May 20, 2004

### zoobyshoe

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.

13. May 20, 2004

### hypnagogue

Staff Emeritus
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 accomodate small scale laundry effects, such as the nonlocal sock phenomenon, within a larger framework of huge conglomerations of laundry as described by Einstein.

14. May 20, 2004

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).

15. May 20, 2004

### 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....Schrodinger'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.

16. May 20, 2004

### 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 blackholes.

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

17. May 20, 2004

### 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

18. May 20, 2004

### Artman

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

19. May 20, 2004

### Tsu

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

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

20. May 20, 2004

### zoobyshoe

Where the hell have you been?