SCP by Series
Other SCP
Feed
Stories
Discovery
Random
I like this and find it interesting, but…
Kilograms are the SI/Metric unit ofmass, not ofweight. I believe that Newtons (N) are the actual SI/Metric unit for weight.
Technically, the Newton is the unit forforce, and i've never heard it used in the context of "On the Moon you would only weigh X Newtons".
Isn't weight defined as "the force exerted by an object due to gravity" or something like that?
It's just, after learning the correct terms, the 'norm' being incorrect is irritating. I'm not even sure if the Imperial system evenhas a unit for mass as opposed to weight, which… has nothing to do with metric.
Even if an object wouldweigh less or more at non-Earth gravity, it would have the same amount of mass regardless of the gravitational force.
This is just a minor nitpick though; if more people like it the way it currently is, then the status quo is probably preferred.
Eating the candy affects the gravitational force exerted on the subject, so I believe it would be correct to say it affects their weight, while their mass remains the same. Since "weight" and "mass" are generally synonymous on Earth, and since we don't normally refer to a person's weight in Newtons, it seems to me that convention would dictate that one describe the weight difference in terms of kilograms, and assume that "subject's weight is reduced to X kilograms" is synonymous with "gravitational force exerted on the subject is reduced to an amount comparable to X kilograms in standard Earth gravity".
No, you… alright, I'll just put this aside for now. On a related note, how exactly do you imagine one would go about determining that any of the subject's mass was the same if their weight changed? You know, being that mass is calculated indirectly from weight and g.
You would measure how quickly they accelerated when a given force was applied (Newton's law: F = ma). For example, put them on roller skates or a skateboard, pull them along using a force measuring device (a simple hanging scale, pulled horizontally, would do), make a video recording, and examine it frame by frame to measure acceleration. (Any Mythbusters fan will be familiar with this technique :) )
Since the change of mass requires the addition or subtraction of matter from the object, gaining or losing mass would make the subject bigger or smaller, or alter their density. If the candies affect the gravitational force exertedupon the subject, determining a change of mass might be as easy as measuring their own gravity with the use of a very sensitive accelerometer, or a torsion balance, testing against a known mass.
You can't necessarily make assumptions like that when dealing with anomalous objects. (Though I do agree with the conclusion for other reasons — density isdefined in terms of mass and volume, so changing mass without changing volume actually does have to change the density.)
Gravity is measured by acceleration, e.g. earth standard is 9.81 m/s2. Mass is in kilograms1 and weight is in Newtons. I have a mass of ~70kg and rounding off acceleration due to gravity to 10 m/s2, I have a weight of 700 N. Kilograms are commonly used as a measure of weight in lay speak due to the fact that gravity is held constant on the surface of the earth, a scientific document studying variation in gravity would use Newtons. Speaking of which, there are tests they could have done to find if it was indeed a change in mass or gravitational acceleration that led to a change in weight.
One issue - the moon's escape velocity is 2.3 kilometers persecond. A jump isn't going to do it. Even if they were under effect of the zero-weight candy, air friction would eventually stop them (unless the candy affects that too)
As for the zero gravity one…. I'm not too sure. If I recall right, aerodynamic drag goes up with the cube of velocity - given this person wasn't going all that quickly, the drag effect would likely be negligible. It's a sort of situation that can't quite happen normally.
Drag goes as a complicated function of velocity, it's modeled as v at low velocities, v squared at higher, presumably it goes above that. I can't be doing with crunching the numbers but I think drag would be important and for the moon you wouldn't escape.
At low velocities, only viscous drag matters as opposed to form drag, and reynolds number for air is big,hence noep.
Noone is saying you'd achieve moon's escape velocity, but for the zero gravity case , I don't think air drag matters enough.
I'm dumb, I forgot to factor in the largest factor in that case - the centrifugal force, at 0.003 g in the direction of the celestial orb.
I could swear I read somewhere once that a running leap on the moon would be sufficient enough that you wouldn't come back down. (Or maybe it was driving a golf ball.)
In any event, I was sort of working from the idea that these candies are based on a 1950s-ish "SCIENCE!" interpretation of how other planets worked - thus the references on the ad copy to Mars having canals, the Great Red Spot being an ocean, etc. The different rates of gravity experienced by the user are correct, but Wondertainment took some liberty with the other effects for high-jink related purposes.
Some of these are a little too malicious for Wondertainment. I can't see them making something that would kill you just from use and nothing else, like the Venus one.
I like to think they believe everyone casually owns spacesuits.
I like to think that the poor sucker who tried the "Planet X" one somehow turned into a nuclear warhead. That being said, +1.
I dunno.
I liked the Willy Wonka reference in the MTF name, but then I read the effects and I feel like it's too close to what happened to Violet, at least at the outset. That, and why is the jawbreaker in the picture wrapped in glass? I mean, it says "wrapper", but that's obviously glass at the ends.
It's been awhile since i've seen the movies - didn't Violet get turned into a giant blueberry? I wasn't going for any intentional similarity there - I just wanted a candy-related reference for the MTF name, and remembered the creepy old guy who played Wonka's rival in the '70s version.
Your definition of "high-jinks" may vary from that used by Dr. Wondertainment
Upvoted +1
The wrapper in the image looks strange to me, like it's a molded piece of solid sugar that's been made to look like a wrapper.
Prominent signage is to be placed on and inside the crate indicating that SCP-1916 is non-edible.
I would think that a warning like that wouldn't be required for people working for the Foundation. I mean, if they had so little common sense that they'd eat something found in aFoundation warehouse, would they have gotten a job with Foundation that allowed them access to that warehouse?
[DATA EXPUNGED]. 82 fatalities at test facility due to exposure to gamma radiation; 438 non-lethal instances of radiation poisoning. Remains of subject have not been located.
Did the gravity become so extreme that the atoms in the subject's body underwent fusion? If so, wouldn't enough fusion to cause fatal radiation poisoning also cause a huge explosion?