- This topic has 8 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 21 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
In Zapp & Roger’s 1980s hip-hop hit single, “More Bounce To The Ounce,” it is declared that a higher ratio of bounce per ounce is generally preferable. I ask anyone who is interested, what is the bounce per ounce of a typical person? How is this measured? Shouldn’t time also be a factor? Perhaps bounce per ounce per minute would be more quantifiably descriptive?
Discuss.
Flamegrape wrote:In Zapp & Roger’s 1980s hip-hop hit single, “More Bounce To The Ounce,” it is declared that a higher ratio of bounce per ounce is generally preferable. I ask anyone who is interested, what is the bounce per ounce of a typical person? How is this measured? Shouldn’t time also be a factor? Perhaps bounce per ounce per minute would be more quantifiably descriptive?
Discuss.
It isn’t the number of bounces produced per ounce that should be measured. In that case, the bpopm measurement proposed would be the most quantifiably descriptive means of relating that information. The message of the song is that each ounce should evidence the maximum bounceability of the elements in question. The measurement of said bounceability involves collating information on a number of aspects of said elements, and also establishing the nature of said bouceability. There are certain things that one may want to see bounce (as per Roger: “I like to watch them bounce”), and certain things that one may want to bounce upon (again, as per Roger: “I like to bounce”). This was the subject of the great 1976 “trampoline vs. Jell-o” debate between Drs. Clinton and Collins of the Parliafunkadelicmental Institute of Supergroovalistiprosifunkstication. A compromise was reached in which it was agreed that the most acceptable situation would be two regions of visible bounce area (VBA) on the upper fore and lower aft, separated by an area of tensile bounce area (TBA) in the mid-fore region, a design property which has been most elegantly stated in the past decades by eminent British scholar Sir Mix-a-lot (currently in residence in the Seattle area).
Ahhh…. an intelligent question that has plagued mankind since the fall of the “Humpty Dance”. Down at Los Alamos Q-Lab an advanced cold storage spinner was dedicated to the process of determining the number of bounces produced per ounce on a wide array of subjects. As Aleck pointed out, we were on the wrong track, proven by caucasians utter failure at producing much bounce per ounce. As it turned out by extrapolating a formula known as “Dre2 or Dre-Cubed” which states:
“It is not the ounces to the bounce but the motion of the ocean”
Led us to believe that the force of momentum it is a key element, unfortunatly testing subjects suffered multiple pelvis fractures in our next phase of testing and funding was eliminated.
Please keep us up to date on your findings.
😉 😉 😉 hehehe!
Flamegrape wrote:But what if the subject contracted Boogie Fever? Would that enhance the ratio of bounce to ounce?
Ah, good question. Boogie Fever, which strikes over half of the adult population of the US at one time or another in their lives, is actually one of the prime conditions under which one can study the “More Bounce to the Ounce” postulate. In studying the manifestation of maximum bounceability of a subject in both VBA and TBA, Boogie Fever provides an optimal situation under which these can be examined. The symptoms of Boogie Fever will show themselves in an increased manifestation of visual bouncing on behalf of the subject, and an increased desire to bounce upon the subject on behalf of the surrounding populace. This also allows the careful researcher to measure the aforementioned bpopm, as the maximum potential bounceability will be evidenced under this condition. The contagion of Boogie Fever, while extremely rampant, should not be of any strong concern, however, and quarantine is not to be called for. It can be easily remedied by administering light doses of Manilow on a regular basis.
((Bf)(E*bcr/2)/L) = bft
I’ve added in the Boogie Fever theorum. We’ve observed severe Travoltism’s when we factor in the Bay City Roller axiom; as such at this rate quarks and leptons break down causing nullentropy fields which persist to this very day evidence of which we find in any common rhinestone or leisure suit. It is our hope the electromagnetism harnessed from free polyester particles will one day be a abundant form of free energy.
”LexxLurker” wrote:((Bf)(E*bcr/2)/L) = bft
Hmmm… could that function be incorporated into this K.C.S.B. formula, Dance (sub little) plus Love (sub little) equals Get Down (sub tonight)?
I think we might be on to something.
And this is why they call us SADgeezers, I believe. 🙄
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.