A bunhole in our rules?
Hi there, fellow bundits!
I was just approached by a stranger (well, a familiar, actually, but a stranger would have been as good for this purpose) who asked me a question: how should the rules of our Society, especially our beloved rule 5.5, be understood when we’re dealing with anti-matter? Could an anti-matter bun be considered a valid bun for a Friday?
I was left speechless (which, as such, happens rarely – unfortunately). Would you have any advice?
July 9th, 2006 at 17:34
Your acquaintance was clever to spot that our rules say absolutely nothing about anti-matter. But did he (something tells me it’s a he) really think we would have accidentally missed or otherwise ignored something so significant? No way. We simply don’t have to say anything about anti-matter, because regardless of what we say, it doesn’t matter. That’s pretty much the whole idea of anti-matter, isn’t it?
Please inform your friend about this and tell that he and his Butt of Wisdom are welcome to join our ranks at any time. This kind of lateral thinking is highly respected within our Society.
July 12th, 2006 at 13:34
Something tells me that there’s a new Wanhack artifact coming up: the Butt of Wisdom. Thank you for the idea.
September 6th, 2006 at 10:21
I am now quite worried, since the concepts of “anti-matter” and “grey goo” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo) have been brought up in discussions lately. Maybe the end of the world as we know it is finally approaching?
To me, anti-matter seems unnatural and frightening, and we should bun I mean ban it somehow. Statements like “anti-matter – it just does not matter” sound awfully close to just wiping the matter under the (already dirty) kitchen carpet, thus failing to address it in a firm and appropriate manner. Maybe there is a conspiracy involved?
September 6th, 2006 at 10:23
Oh, a correction. We are of course wiping anti-matter, not matter. Sorry for the anti-Freudian slip.