[Prev][Next][Index]
Yucks Digest V2 #26
Yucks Digest Thu, 23 Apr 92 Volume 2 : Issue 26
Today's Topics:
`Mansion' is a weird wonder
Body Checks into the CD Corner
Congressional Quicken
Essential reading for would be scientists
fortran purity test
FYI
MONDO 2000 poem
The "Yucks" digest is a moderated list of the bizarre, the unusual,
the sometimes risque, the possibly insane, and the (usually) humorous.
It is issued on a semi-regular basis, as the whim and time present
themselves.
Back issues and subscriptions can be obtained using a mail server. Send
mail to "yucks-request@cs.purdue.edu" with a "Subject:" line of the single
word "help" for instructions.
Submissions and problem reports should be sent to spaf@cs.purdue.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 92 19:01:36 PST
From: one of our correspondents
Subject: `Mansion' is a weird wonder
To: yucks-request
By Robert P. Laurence
Copley News Service
It's not always the funniest thing on TV, but if they gave out
Emmies for "Most Peculiar," "Maniac Mansion" would be a top
contender.
How else do you classify a comedy about a sincere but inept
basement scientist whose household includes a fly with a human head
and a 4-year-old son who stands 6-foot-4 and weighs 250 pounds?
Standing conceptually somewhere between "Frankenstein's Family"
and "The Addams Family Father Knows Best," "Maniac Mansion" is
actually the first live-action TV series to emerge from George Lucas'
Lucasfilms production company, "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles"
notwithstanding.
You've never heard of it? You're not alone. Cable's Family Channel,
usually the home of Cream of Wheat-wholesome programs, the channel
where Pat Boone might be considered a little on the controversial
side, is not where you'd expect to find anything so off-kilter.
But the little-known show is well into its second season on the
Family Channel. It's attained considerably wider fame in its home
country of Canada, where it's seen on YTV, a north-of-the-border
counterpart to Nickelodeon.
Borrowing its title and lead character from a Lucas video game,
"Maniac Mansion" can gross you out one minute and delight you the
next with a bull's-eye takeoff on a favorite movie or TV show. Most of
the actors and writers are alumni of the old SCTV comedy sketch
series, and they've brought their squirrelly sensibilities with them
to the Toronto set.
That set, by the way, may look familiar to anyone who's ever toured
a home designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. It's a deliberate, lovingly
detailed copy of the unique Wright style, complete with geometric
patterns that repeat themselves in the stained-glass windows, concrete
pillars and furniture.
Heading up the cast is SCTV's Joe Flaherty as Dr. Fred Edison,
whose experiments never quite work out.
As a result of an accident in his basement laboratory, his
4-year-old son, Turner, has suddenly grown to the size of a very large
adult, played with a squeaky voice by hulking George Buza, a veteran
of both SCTV and numerous horror flicks. In the same accident, Uncle
Harry's body was exchanged with that of a fly, leaving the household
with a flying, talking fly, played by John Hemphill.
Other characters include Fred's patient wife, Casey (Deborah
Theaker), his son, Ike (Avi Phillips), and Harry's wife, Idella
(Charlotte Wilcox).
Spoofs of other shows and movies are a staple of the "Maniac
Mansion" repertoire. Jose Ferrer last fall was victimized by one of
Fred's experiments in an episode that seemed quite like "The Man Who
Came to Dinner." An episode starring another SCTV alum, Dave Thomas,
accurately satirized "The Godfather," complete with romantic Italian
music and the ring-kissing scene witnessed through a doorway.
The man in charge of "Maniac Mansion" these days is creative
producer Michael Short, who says, "It has an English sensibility to
it, in that you take an absurd situation and then play the reality of
it. Here's the absurdity, now what if it really happened. Suppose your
uncle really was a fly with a human head?"
Short, speaking from his home in Dudas, a small town about 40 miles
from Toronto "Where I can escape the hurly-burly of Toronto life"
carefully explained that Fred is definitely not your typical movie
mad scientist.
"He's just a guy who loves science," Short said. "He's got all
the spirit and desire in the world. He hasn't quite got the talent the
others had. The spirit is definitely there."
Might Fred have been another Dr. Frankenstein, if he were only a
little brighter? "Yeah! Right! Now his quest is to see if he can get
Turner and Harry back to normal."
What happened to Turner and Harry, he added, "was not Fred's
fault." Turner chased a ball into Fred's transmogrifier chamber, and
Harry followed Turner. When the door opened again, well ...
But Short couldn't explain it in any more detail than that:
"There's a few holes in the scientific part of it. I'm not going to
try to cover those."
Fred, nevertheless, "would like to change the world. First he
wants to get Harry and Turner back. He's fascinated by new
discoveries. He's obsessed with it. He's what we would want all
scientists to be, but we'd want them a little more talented."
The producers of "Maniac Mansion," meanwhile, are working on
another experiment, one more successful than what Fred has
accomplished so far. They're hoping to go into their own laboratories
and come out with a "Maniac Mansion" movie.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 92 11:38:06 -0800
From: brian@UCSD.EDU (Brian Kantor)
Subject: Body Checks into the CD Corner
To: spaf
Body Checks into the CD Corner
(a review of Mercury's Living Presence CD reissue of Dorati
conducting Respighi. Mercury:432-007-2)
by Ian Klymchuk
(President, Lucan Chapter, Philistine Liberation Organization)
Last night I went out to the townhouse complex to see Benny. His old
lady had called to say he was worried about his ticker. Could I please come
over for awhile? So as I arrived, I was as at least as concerned about his
frame of mind as his ventricular hoohah. But after a few words about his
health, we started watching a hockey game on tv and got to talking about
hockey's good old days.
Soon, Benny was blathering about how the old players was better than
today's players. I knew that with his worries about his aortic whoogee, I
should just shut up, but that didn't stop me. I dropped my stick and gloves
and let him have it.
"Benny," I sez. "The athletes these days are in better shape. They know
more about the game. They got better equipment and better technique. Wake
up and smell the coffee."
And that's about how I'd describe the reissue by Mercury of Anatoli
DorsalFin conducting some junk Respighi.
The beginning of this CD sounds like some kids' group. They don't play
in tune, and the attacks are sloppy. I've never heard the London Symphony
Orchestra (the other one) sound so bad. It's like they're passing the puck out
of the corners without looking.
Also, I don't much like Respighi (have you ever, even once, heard
someone walking down the street whistling something by Respighi? I rest my
case). And these particular performances were about as good as the 1989
Maple Leafs - they belong in the cellar.
About this time, Benny's old lady chirps in, "But Ian, wasn't the game
more real back then?"
What kind of drivel is that? Ok, Ok, there was some great players back
when we was kids, but there was lots of bad ones, too, and the bad plays
were about as much fun to watch as the kid next door picking his nose.
Ditto the performances under the stick of Angelo Dorito. Anyone who
compares performances of the Minneapolis Symphony (the performers on the
second half of this CD) under DoughRahTee and under Skrowaczewsky can
tell The Skrow knew how to get the most out of his players. Dorati put up
with slop, compared with The Skrow. The Skrow is to Scotty Bowman as
Do-Re-Ti is to Red Kelley.
Yeah, yeah, ain't it a wonder how much modern technology can bring
them old performances back to life? Almost like colourizing the films of the
1937 Stanley Cup. But let's face it: old performances ain't what they're
cracked up to be. The musicians were NOT always better. The conductors of
the 1950s probably built their reputations sipping wine at home while the
tough ones was off fighting wars. And no amount of remastering will make
those old performances sound as good as newer ones.
So my advice? Don't buy this CD. Get one for Benny, though. He likes
that old junk even if it ain't as good as the stuff they put out today.
John Palmer London, Ontario Voice: (519) 661-3533 FAX: 672-4976
reply to palmer2@vaxr.sscl.uwo.ca The Economics Institute for Journalists
(edited from an earlier post to rec.music.classical)
------------------------------
Date: 17 Mar 92 08:20:07 GMT
From: jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay)
Subject: Congressional Quicken
Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny
With all of the check writing problems Congress-Critters are having now Intuit,
the makers of the best selling home finance software Quicken, would like to
introduce their newest in a line of financial software:
Congressional Quicken
Congressional Quicken is a new version of Quicken written specifically for
Congress people who have trouble keeping track of their financial status.
With Congressional Quicken we took regular Quicken and redesigned it with a
much simplified interface (we know our clientele). Congressional Quicken
has features specifically designed to make sure that the Congress person can
never become overdrawn or face the embarassment of overdrafting a check.
(Thereby avoiding the rath of the lowly voter.)
Here is what a normal Quicken account might look like:
==============================================================================
|Date | Check # | To/From: | Debit | Credit | Total |
| 282.51|
==============================================================================
|03/12| 192 | To: Grocery Store (food) | 87.33 | | 195.18|
|03/15| DEP | From: Work (salary) | | 135.66 | 330.84|
|03/17| 193 | To: Credit Card | 450.00 | | -119.16|
==============================================================================
Notice how check 193 caused the total to go negative (a cash flow reversal),
this could never happen with Congressional Quicken. Here is a sample from
one of the top Congressional seats that uses Congressional Quicken:
==============================================================================
|Date | Check # | To/From: | Credit | Total |
| 158932.21|
==============================================================================
|03/12| 192 | To: Grocery Store (party) | 2153.45 | 161085.66|
|03/15| DEP | From: Bribe (salary) | 5625.00 | 166710.66|
|03/17| 193 | To: Credit Card (party) | 8321.88 | 175032.54|
==============================================================================
Enhanced features of Congressional Quicken:
No debit column - Everything is counted as a credit. Makes it much easier
for the busy Congress person who now doesn't need to worry
about the headache of subtraction and when to "borrow" from
one column.
Expanded Credit and Total columns - No more worry about how to squeeze in those
extra numbers when the next pay raise rolls
around.
All this and many, many more features for the unbelievably low price of
$7995
Cash only. No checks, no credit cards, no exceptions.
(we know that regular Quicken is only $79.95, but hey this is a government
thing)
Order now and you will also receive our highly acclaimed pop-up TSR:
Budget Busters
Yes, Budget Busters, the very same program that is used by such overpaid,
under-responsible US executives as:
a former-president of United Way, who had this to say about Budget Busters,
"With out Budget Busters I could not have earned $460,000 as the
president of a charity. It helped me to hide my salary for years
and I won't even talk about the perks that it helped me to get."
a CEO of IBM, "Do you really think that I could have helped IBM lose
as many millions of dollars as I did, blast my employees for
being lazy, and give myself a 17% pay raise without the help of
Budget Busters."
Many executives at GMC, "Budget Busters helped us to dole out $80 million
in executive bonus's while our company was going down the tubes."
Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) handling the S&L bailout, "Without the
help of Budget Busters could we say 'What $7 billion?'"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 92 15:57:26 -0800
From: bostic@okeeffe.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Keith Bostic)
Subject: Essential reading for would be scientists
To: /dev/null@okeeffe.CS.Berkeley.EDU
Announcing a new journal for the busy academic:
Pro Forma:
The Magazine for the Busy Academic
Volume 1 Number 1 June, 1992
A new journal devoted to those who do not have time to read it.
No articles - no commentary - no book reviews!
All sections can be read in less time than it takes to advise the
average undergraduate student.
Here are some of the topics and sections to appear in the first
issue:
The Legal Advisor:
"Don't Publish - Don't Perish: Creative Litigation and Tenure"
The Art of the Conference:
"Being a Discussant Without Reading the Papers"
* Opening remarks for every session
"These papers admirably demonstrate both the strengths
and weaknesses of the field today."
"It is nice to see that some people can still get
interested in this topic."
* 10 French names that intimidate
* 10 all-purpose long summary sentences with no content
* The art of academic flattery through easy key words
"seminal, pathbreaking, essential, fundamental....."
"The All-Purpose Abstract"
* Just fill in five blanks and this abstract works in any
discipline, for any conference.
* Abstracts that describe any paper you later write
Postmodern, Positivist, Critical, Feminist
"When You Just can't write the Paper - Creative Withdrawls
from the Program"
Easier Publishing:
"Citation analysis: Journals in your discipline that are
desperate for papers"
"Ins and outs of repeat publishing - change that title!"
"One paper - eight foreign Graduate students - eight
translations - eight foreign publications - all in six
months!"
The Tenure and Promotion File:
"How to form or join a citation circle"
* Agreements that multiply your entries in the annual
citation index by 10
"Make a 1-page comment count the same as a book
"Obscure journals that sound important
"5 ways to get your book accepted without review"
"Getting good letters from people who don't know you"
The Pro Forma Bookshelf
"100 One-Line Current Book Summaries"
* Allows you to freely cite pages, without buying or
reading the book!
* Easy-to remember critiques for conversation or class
* Classified by discipline
* Rated for political correctness by our panel
"Boilerplate - A New Computer Program that Writes Half
of your Monograph"
"Classics in Your Discipline"
* Survey reports how many of your colleagues have actually
read the classics in your field.
Cooperation Column:
Co-Authorship Exchange
Have Data, Need Theory
Have Theory, Need Data
Washington Buzzword Watch
Regular updates from the Beltway Bandit
What is Hot in NSF and NEH Panels this year
Trends in Cross-Disciplinary Buzzword Transmission
Plus! These new columns to appear in the next issue
Advising Timesavers
Dissertation Defenses without Preparation
Advertisers
Submission Services International
We reformat and resubmit until you get accepted!
Thousands of journals on our lists!
Data Recycling Central
Don't throw that old data away! We have buyers for
good pre-owned data sets, lab notes and interview
transcripts!
FINALLY, SOME REALLY USEFUL ADVICE ON HOW TO SURVIVE IN ACADEMIA!!
------------------------------
Date: 16 Mar 92 00:30:05 GMT
From: emv@ox.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Subject: fortran purity test
Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny
By: burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley)
Organization: Free Software Foundation 545 Tech Square Cambridge, MA 02139
In article <1992Jan03.201629.20247walt@netcom.COM> walt@netcom.COM (Walt Brainerd) writes:
Each member of X3J3 will complete the following form,
the secretary will record the total points, and the member
will be allowed that many votes on each issue. I apologize
to the secretary for the extra work involved, but fairness
is surely more important.
[...]
To the secretary: please put me down as having 77 votes.
Of course, I tried to rig it so I would have the most points,
but Jim Matheny of CSC had more.
Ok, conservatively, I have 1+14+22+0+(-11) = 26 points (sure hope I added and
subtracted right! :-). The -11 might be a bit extreme, but I really can't
remember writing anything over 500 in Fortran that's "important" since 1980
or 81 or so.
Does this mean I'm not allowed to write a Fortran compiler? :-)
I think another fun way to determine how many votes people on X3J3 get is
to come up with a test of ones' _current_ perceptions of Fortran and it's
place in the industry. It should be mostly multiple-choice/true-false but
perhaps some essay questions as well.
For example (with answers at the bottom of the post, but not upside-down):
--------
Question 1: The forthcoming Fortran standard [now F90] is important because:
a) It will make it easier for people to write useful Fortran programs
b) It will give compiler vendors more work to do and products to sell
c) It will make it easier for people to teach others how to write Fortran
d) It will serve as the ideal application lanuguage for Windows 3.0
Question 2: The Fortran 77 standard was important because:
a) It was the first time anyone ever wrote down what Fortran was supposed
to be used for
b) Its deadpan writing style was the perfect antidote to the '70s disco
craze
c) Nobody thought it was possible
d) It gave compiler vendors more work to do and products to sell
e) It made it easier for people to write useful Fortran programs
Question 3: The arithmetic-IF (three-way) statement is in the Fortran
language because:
a) IF statements having higher prime numbers of branches (five, seven, and
so on) were found hard to implement on binary computers
b) It used to be the only way for people to write useful Fortran programs
c) It more closely models human expectations than the logical-IF statement,
since at most intersections, a driver has three choices as to which
direction to take
d) It makes writing applications for Windows 3.0 easier
Question 4: NAMELIST was added to the forthcoming Fortran standard because:
a) There was no other way to make people use it
b) There was no other way to stop people from using it
c) It makes writing device drivers for UNIX easier
d) People claimed it would make it easier for them to write useful Fortran
programs
e) Visual BASIC has it
Question 5: Recent and future Fortran standards disallow multiple-dummy
and/or dummy/common aliasing of any variable when the called procedure
modifies any variable involved in the aliasing because:
a) It will give compiler vendors less work to do and faster products to
sell
b) There should really be only one way to skin a cat
c) Fortran programming is for people who have nothing else to do but
remember obscure rules like this
d) It makes it easier for people to write useful Fortran programs
d) I don't know what a dummy is
Question 6: Despite the fact that almost all Fortran implementations are on
machines that use binary arithmetic, numerical constants in Fortran are
expressed in decimal (base 10) notation because:
a) It makes it easier for people to write useful Fortran programs
b) There's only so much a computer should know
c) Lots of Fortran programmers are used to COBOL PIC(999) stuff
d) Keypunch machines are notoriously difficult when it comes to punching
hexadecimal (base 16) numbers
e) It will give anal-retentive mathematicians more explaining to do about
how you never quite get what you want with floating-point, and that
seems to keep them happy
Question 7: The name FORTRAN itself means:
a) FORmula TRANslation
b) FORTy RANdom features in one language
c) FORget your computer-science TRAiNing
d) FOR The Right ANswers
e) Fortran Only Resembles Text Remotely At Night
f) Nothing, it is one of those made-up marketing names like MUMPS
--------
I'm sure many of the rest of you could contribute more. Then we'd have
something _real_ with which to test people! (On the other hand, my use of
grammar in the previous sentence, where I refused to end a sentence with a
preposition, should invalidate me for membership on most committees. :-)
--------
Here are my proposed "points" for the above questions, and the reasons why:
(Following the form-feed, of course.)
Question 1:
a) 10 points -- You can't argue with this and be useful to X3J3
b) 10 points -- You can't argue with this and be useful to X3J3
c) 9 points -- Point off for thinking teaching is as important as selling
and using, since there's little money in teaching
d) 0 points -- Try again when we start the standardization process
for Visual FORTRAN
Question 2:
a) 2 points -- Nice fantasy
b) 3 points -- True, but we fear your antidote to New Age music
c) 4 points -- Doing the impossible gets boring after a while on X3J3
d) 10 points -- Cynicism important for X3J3 reps
e) 10 points -- Cynicism important for X3J3 reps
Question 3:
a) 1 point -- For at least keeping up with comp.arch
b) 10 points -- Your grasp of history is impeccable
c) 5 points -- Always good to model human situations, but think: are such
intersections ideal, or perhaps modeled on Fortran?
d) 0 points -- Not true, since mouse up/down/drag status is not available
as an integer value
Question 4:
a) 0 points -- Oh come on!
b) 1 point -- Right idea, wrong application
c) 0 points -- This is never a reason for a Fortran feature, and wrong too
d) 10 points -- Truly, there seems to be no other answer
e) 5 points -- Excellent abstract thinking, points off for being mistaken
Question 5:
a) 10 points -- A longer answer is possible, but a waste of time
b) 9 points -- Not quite as eloquently expressed as a)
c) 8 points -- Mostly true, but if we can get others to try it as well,
compiler vendors can sell more compilers
d) 4 points -- Only if you replace "easier" and "useful" with "possible"
and "fast"
e) 10 points -- You are likely to be excellent in X3J3 diplomacy
Question 6:
a) 10 points -- Strangely, most people still think in base 0xA
b) 4 points -- True in sentiment, false in implementation, decimal gives
the compiler _more_ information than it needs, sometimes
c) 2 points -- It doesn't help them any, actually; COBOL programmers don't
even understand what is meant by "Division" in Fortran
d) 7 points -- Modern keypunch machines have their own hex entry pads
e) 10 points -- The scary thing is, they're right
Question 7:
a) 10 points
b) 9 points -- One point off for minor historical inaccuracy
c) 4 points -- Cynicism not _that_ important to X3J3
d) 5 points -- Wrong, but simple-minded answer suggests malleable X3J3
voter
e) 1 point -- X3J3 hardly needs more recursive-acronym-loving FSF weenies
f) 0 points -- Not even close
--------
NOTE: This sample test is protected by the GNU Public License. You may
redistribute it only if you include with the distribution all the answers
and free copies of the Fortran 66, Fortran 77, and Fortran 90 standards,
plus MIL-STD 1753, for the recipients' background reading.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 92 10:52:24 -0500
From: "Richard Newman-Wolfe" <nemo@chameleon.cis.ufl.edu>
Subject: FYI
To: spaf
Sender: sam@csi.compuserve.com
To: Distribution:;
From: sam@csi.compuserve.com
Subject: Michelangelo Virus Hysteria Syndrome
From: qralston@gl.pitt.edu (James Ralston Crawford)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 92 12:20:8 EST
MICHELANGELO VIRUS HYSTERIA SYNDROME
Mass hysteria about a virus named "Michelangelo" has been spreading rapidly
in MS-DOS-based personal computer users around the world. This scare is
"triggered" each year slightly before March 6, Michelangelo's birthday. No
one is immune... people ranging from university students to the staff of
_Nightline_ have been affected.
According to various psychologists, the Michelangelo Virus hysteria is
spread though almost any media channel... written, electronic, oral,
computer networks, or on-line services. Once a person is "infected", he
will attempt to automatically spread the hysteria to every person he sees.
The hysteria also corrupts base reasoning and logic, so loss of common
sense is often a symptom. This is unfortunate, since the hysteria can be
eliminated at any time with common sense. This means that ONCE ACTIVATED,
the hysteria cannot be easily removed; the easiest thing to do is to let it
dissipate naturally on March 7.
There have been numerous known occurrences of this hysteria at the
University of Pittsburgh's campus. This has been caused by saturated
distribution of virus protection and detection software, and repeated and
redundant email messages.
We advise you NOT to attempt to trick people into believing that March 6
has already passed in order to avoid the hysteria. (Even though we tell
you about 3 paragraphs later that we tried it anyway.)
The Michelangelo virus hysteria displays pronounced symptoms, which makes
it easy to detect. Some possible symptoms of this virus hysteria include,
but are not limited to...
1. Running virus-checking runs 6,000 times (per disk.)
2. Sending repeated and redundant email messages.
3. Sending repeated and redundant email messages.
4. Sending repeated and redundant email messages.
5. Photocopying 50,000 flyers and distributing them in every possible
location on campus.
6. Irrational fear/paranoia of or destructive behavior towards
computers. (Pushing them off of rooftops, etc.)
7. Using typewriters.
In addition, Dr. Ima Quak of the Bureau of Useless and Lame Laws advises
that "we have determined that this hysteria seems to have an almost annual
cycle to it. Perhaps this can help us in detecting it."
Any person that is not infected and has common sense can also detect the
Michelangelo Virus hysteria.
SOLUTION
There are many trained psychologists that can detect and/or remove the
Michelangelo virus hysteria. However, these steps are usually not
necessary. The following techniques have been used to combat the hysteria:
1. Vigorous shaking and/or slapping.
2. Large quantities of cold water (a fire hose, for example.)
3. Avoiding watching _Nightline_.
4. Accurate, brief, and non-redundant information.
Rest assured that some steps *are* being taken to help prevent this
hysteria. In fact, just yesterday University of Pittsburgh Chancellor J.
Dennis O'Connor approved $82,000 to form a committee to appoint a committee
to call a meeting to look into the matter.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Watch for future bulletins.
If you believe you might be infected with the Michelangelo virus hysteria,
please slap yourself once or twice, and ask someone to hose you down with a
fire hose.
------------------------------
Date: 03 Feb 92 17:33:41 EST
From: The Mad Poet <71110.4334@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: MONDO 2000 poem
Newsgroups: alt.society.cu-digest
DOES SHE DO THE VULCAN MIND MELD ON THE FIRST DATE?
By Nick Herbert
From MONDO 2000, the magazine for cyberspace
I want your bra size, baby,
Fax number, E-mail address,
Modem com code, ID,
Phone machine access.
Give me your thumb print, password,
Blood type and credit check;
Give me your antibody spectrum,
Your immune response spec.
Let's break bread together, baby,
Exchange cryptographic primes;
Let's link up our parallel ports;
And go on-line in real-time.
Let's indulge in covalent bondage;
Let's communicate in C.
Let's merge our energy bodies
And bob in the quantum sea.
I wanna swim in your gene pool, mama;
Snort your pheromones up close range;
Tune in your neurotransmitters,
Introduce you to Doctor Strange.
I wanna surf in your quantum potentia;
Mess with your thermostat;
Wanna tour your molecular orbits;
Wanna feed your Schrodinger cat.
Let's surgically merge our organs;
Our kidneys, our lungs and our hearts;
Let's read physics journals together
And laugh at the dirty parts.
Let's Bell-connect our bellies
With some quantum-adhesive glue;
Let's do new stuff to each other
That Newton never knew.
I wanna feel your viscosity, honey,
Melt my rheological mind;
Let your female force-field vortex
Deform my male spacetime.
------------------------------
End of Yucks Digest
------------------------------