▼

Saturday, April 9, 2011

There aren't enough points on the chicken

This is what happens when synæsthetes become celebrity chefs. They insist that every dish has its own ideal platonic shape so that serving it in any other geometry detracts from the flavour.

I can cope with triangular omelettes and snowflake-fractal pizza, but why should sausages always be sausage-shaped?

Then there's the whole "colour palate" business.

UPDATE: Bonus Möbius pasta [for ckc (not kc) in comments].
at

36 comments:

  1. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 4:46 PM

    ...mobius omelettes - how much?

    ReplyDelete
  2. M. BouffantApril 9, 2011 at 4:48 PM

    Non-sausage sausages are much more difficult to shove up one's nose.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 4:50 PM

    ¨

    ReplyDelete
  4. Smut ClydeApril 9, 2011 at 4:59 PM

    Lamb biryani should be moulded into a perfect sphere so you can apply the Banach-Tarski decomposition and obtain two helpings of lamb biryani.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Substance McGravitasApril 9, 2011 at 5:02 PM

    All that crap about square meals is explained.

    ReplyDelete
  6. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 5:08 PM

    Make sure that you understand this last line, because it is at the core of the proof.

    ...can't I just get a refill on my coffee??

    ReplyDelete
  7. Smut ClydeApril 9, 2011 at 5:18 PM

    Insert joke here about millefeuille pastry and a 3D manifold.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 5:26 PM

    (I've never been nagged by Wikipedia before - it was a shock.)

    3D?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dr.KennethNoisewaterApril 9, 2011 at 6:00 PM

    I think chicken should be shaped like cow. Failing that, the sexy ladeez on mudflaps.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 6:04 PM

    ...my turn?

    I would like the non-vegan mushrooms on toast, please.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Smut ClydeApril 9, 2011 at 6:10 PM

    I asked for an omelette without the extras and they served it as a projective plain.

    ReplyDelete
  12. mikeyApril 9, 2011 at 6:18 PM

    Ok, umm, yeah, lemme get the omelet too, gently folded and can you sprinkle a little Melange on that?

    Yeah, and a glass of milk.

    Thanks...

    ReplyDelete
  13. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 6:24 PM

    One can construct a coordinate "ring"—a so-called planar ternary ring (not a genuine ring)—corresponding to any projective plane in the combinatorial definition. A planar ternary ring need not be a field or division ring, and there are many projective planes that are not constructed from a division ring. They are called non-Desarguesian projective planes and are an active area of research.
    Algebraic properties of this planar ternary coordinate ring turn out to correspond to geometric incidence properties of the plane. For example, Desargues' theorem corresponds to the coordinate ring's being obtained from a division ring, while Pappus's theorem corresponds to this ring's being obtained from a commutative field. Alternative, not necessarily associative, division algebras like the octonions correspond to Moufang planes.

    ...hmmm...yes, just the check, please.

    ReplyDelete
  14. tigrisApril 9, 2011 at 6:44 PM

    Torricelli's trumpet = NOT a bottomless cup of coffee, hmph. Sweet toroids are good, though.

    Captcha goes POING.

    ReplyDelete
  15. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 6:48 PM

    ...although octonions do sound good - are they deep fried?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hamish MackApril 9, 2011 at 6:51 PM

    You DON'T point this chicken

    ReplyDelete
  17. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 6:56 PM

    You know those octonions?.. they are (so I've "learned") related to exceptional Lie groups ...with an election underway hereabouts, I think I'll keep my eye out for them.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Smut ClydeApril 9, 2011 at 6:59 PM

    Oh yay, people are providing free downloads of "Mathematics Made Difficult".
    This could end badly.

    ReplyDelete
  19. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©April 9, 2011 at 6:59 PM

    11$ for pancakes?

    Hmph!!!
    ~

    ReplyDelete
  20. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 7:01 PM

    This could end badly.

    What do you mean, "end"?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Smut ClydeApril 9, 2011 at 7:03 PM

    This could converge upon a limit badly.

    ReplyDelete
  22. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 7:06 PM

    I was thinking "badly begun is half done"

    ReplyDelete
  23. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 7:07 PM

    my motto, by the way (on Wednesdays)

    ReplyDelete
  24. TruculentandUnreliableApril 9, 2011 at 7:10 PM

    Insert some lazy-ass joke about pi here.

    ReplyDelete
  25. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 7:15 PM

    ...chicken should be shaped like cow.

    ...well, from my recent experience with Wikipedia, I'm sure that you can easily find a mathematician to assure you that they are.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Smut ClydeApril 9, 2011 at 7:23 PM

    Torricelli's trumpet

    This is what the chicken chef should have aimed for if he was "trying to keep the volume down", rather than a sphere.

    ReplyDelete
  27. ckc (not kc)April 9, 2011 at 7:28 PM

    ...I've been known to approach a pie.

    ReplyDelete
  28. tigrisApril 9, 2011 at 7:33 PM

    This could converge upon a limit badly.

    No oblique comments about my asymptote.

    ReplyDelete
  29. mikeyApril 9, 2011 at 9:25 PM

    Torricelli's trumpet

    Yeah, sure, if'n you want.

    Me? I've never had the courage to pick fresh mushrooms...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Big Bad Bald BastardApril 9, 2011 at 11:09 PM

    but why should sausages always be sausage-shaped?

    And why can't meatballs be cubes?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Big Bad Bald BastardApril 10, 2011 at 2:27 AM

    I would like the non-vegan mushrooms on toast, please.

    One order of "ant-zombifying fungi" coming up!

    ReplyDelete
  32. WillyApril 10, 2011 at 5:05 AM

    but why should sausages always be sausage-shaped?

    As a person whose name is synonymous with sausage, I can tell you sausage isn't always wrapped in a pig's intestines.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Smut ClydeApril 10, 2011 at 5:12 AM

    No oblique comments about my asymptote.
    If The Great Gazoogle is to be believed, no-one has ever asked the question "Does this [X] make my asymptote look big?"

    ReplyDelete
  34. fishApril 10, 2011 at 6:29 AM

    I am pretty sure folding a plain omlette is the principle behind warp drive.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Dr.KennethNoisewaterApril 10, 2011 at 6:45 AM

    ...well, from my recent experience with Wikipedia, I'm sure that you can easily find a mathematician to assure you that they are.

    My not being a mathematician myself, I'm an easy mark.

    It was cold here yesterday. Now I'm doubting global warming.

    ReplyDelete
  36. tigrisApril 10, 2011 at 7:38 AM

    If The Great Gazoogle is to be believed, no-one has ever asked the question "Does this [X] make my asymptote look big?"

    And only one for "make my asymptote look fat"! Zounds! Of course, the response is "only for very large values of you."

    ReplyDelete