hairy ball theorem

  • Thread starter Thread starter dextrous
  • Start date Start date
mate at work used to call them "sexy doughnuts".. when asked why by the 'prentice he replied "how do you think they make the hole?"
 
Next time you use a pair of rubber gloves, you're going to smile when you think of this:

A dentist noticed that his next patient, a little old lady, was
nervous so he decided to tell her a little joke as he put on his
gloves.

"Do you know how they make these gloves?" he asked.

"No, I don't," she replied.

"Well," he spoofed, "there's a building in Canada with a big tank
of latex and workers of all hand sizes walk up to the tank, dip in
their hands, let them dry, then peel off the gloves and throw them
into boxes of the right size."

She didn't crack a smile.

"Oh, well. I tried," he thought.

But five minutes later, during a delicate portion of the procedure,
she burst out laughing.

"What's so funny?" he asked.

"I was just envisioning how condoms are made!"

Gotta watch those little old ladies! Their minds are always
working!
 
Now this reminds me of an alleged joke.

A man went for an interview for a job involving quality control in a condom factory.

The manager shows him into a room, and calls out for one of the girls from the typing pool. In comes a beautiful young lass, and the manager and the girl proceed to get undressed, put on a condom selected randomly from a box and have sex.

Afterwards, the manager explains that this is the safest and best way to test the reliability of their products. Having looked around the typing pool, he sees that all the typists are very attractive indeed, so he accepts the post immediately.

He turns up for work on the Monday, and goes into his office and gets undressed. In walks an absolute dragon, who proceeds to put a condom on him and jerk him off roughly. This happens throughout the day. Not happy about this, he phones his manager to complain.

The manager explains - "Sorry, but I thought you knew, you have to work the first month in hand" :roll:
 
dave.m said:
Hard to prove, or disprove, because I have never come across a hairy doughnut

There is a rigorous mathematical proof. I know this because I had to do it at university long, long ago. We called it the hairy dog theorem but it was the same idea. You cannot get all the hairs on a ball to lie smooth. There will always be at least two singularities.

One solution gives you a source and a sink (that's maths speak for a bald spot and a tuft). The only other solution has two vortices. If you want to look at this as wind flow, a source (bald spot) is a point where air appears out of nowhere and a sink (tuft) is where it vanishes. A vortex is still a vortex.

Now for the clever bit. A dog is not a ball; it's a torus (doughnut), the through hole being its alimentary canal. So now the problem is solved. You position the tuft over its mouth, open the mouth and comb the hairs into it. They emerge from its a*se to fill the bald spot. :D :D :D

PS: The torus has some other useful topological properties. Problem: You have to get water, gas and electric supplies from three seperate start points to three houses. Can you do it without any of the pipes or cables crossing each other. Answer: not on the surface of a sphere - but you COULD do it if the Earth was doughnut shaped.

PPS: Going back to the hairy ball problem, you can't get out of it by dragging the source around to meet the sink. This will give you a dipole, which is a pair of vortices side by side. :( :( :(
 
Space: what was the subject at Uni that used sticking hairs down a dog's throat as an allegory?
 
No, it was just topology. I think the lecturer used the hairy dog model precisely because a dog has a hole through the middle. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
No, it was just topology. I think the lecturer used the hairy dog model precisely because a dog has a hole through the middle. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Was catastrophe theory the big thing in your time? Seem to remember looking at "shadows" projected by surface cusps to ascertain when prisoners might riot!
 
...mans interference with the natural shoreline and making/breaking of natural breakwaters.

Scientists realised in the fifties/sixties that altering the shoreline in one place had an effect on somewhere else. However, they did not, and I believe still do not, realise how great an impact it had.
By stopping or reducing the incoming seas from touching land at a certain point, i.e. build a sea defence wall along a 3 mile stretch of coastline, you will simply divert the water to somewhere else. This could cause the sea level to rise at a spot further along the coast where it could start to erode a cliff face due to the rise in level now battering against a weaker sub-strata.
For example when it came in at its 'natural' height the waves would pound against a hard rock bed, by causing the level to rise it causes it to now pound against the upper level of sub-strata which may be something soft like sandstone thereby eroding the cliff face.

Could we reverse the effect?
No. Because the original coast line has altered, removing all man made structures simply wouldn't turn the clock back and re-establish the status-quo.
 
Ok, so after the jokes I tried to turn it serious again. :oops:

Sorry. :oops: :oops:
 
Ok, so after the jokes I tried to turn it serious again. Sorry.

Not at all! :) :) :) I remember some of the early sea-wall designs. They were cleverly designed to reflect wave energy back to sea. It seemed like a good idea at the time but it was flawed. Subsequent designs aimed to absorb the energy instead.

removing all man made structures simply wouldn't turn the clock back and re-establish the status-quo

You've spent too much time listening to Radio One. Status Quo are alive and kicking and will live forever -
party421.gif
- like Michael Jackson. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Oops, oops and thrice oops!
angelharp.gif


But what the hell. Long live free speech, fee love and free radio, 'cause the party ain't over yet! :P :P :P
 
Status Quo? Great!

Radio 1? Abslute ****e!
Tried not to listen to that station since my early 20's! :shock:
The presenters are SOOOOOO full of themselves!
And the amount of talking they do! Its unbelieveable! If they spoke half as much as they do they could play another 12 songs per hour! (Well, what they pass off as songs these days that is).
Unfortunately when I am on days that is what they listen to in work and us oldies have to suffer!

Bring back Jimmy Young, Tony Blacburn, Simon Dee, Simon Bates etc!
Not forgetting of course Jimmy Saville! Aaarrrrrrrrgh.

"Whats the recipe today Jim?"
and that romance thing Simon Bates used to do! :lol: :lol:
 
Back
Top