Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   Scientists study "Cheerio Effect" -- AKA why floating pieces of cereal clump together in milk. Still no cure for cancer   ( msnbc.msn.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

8488 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Sep 2005 at 5:16 AM (12 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



104 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2005-09-21 10:03:56 PM  
I thought it was something alog the lines of the Bernoulli Effect.
/don't know, not a scientist, also not on TV
 
2005-09-21 10:10:45 PM  
It is an imbalance in the surface tension. As the two pieces (or more) drift together from disipating kinetic energy in the liquid, their mass displaces water. As they near, it lessens the surface tension between the objects, causing the constant surface tension on the oposite sides to overpower the weakening tension in the middle, thus pushing the two pieces together. Or, thats what I think, anyway. Anyone agree?
 
2005-09-21 10:11:06 PM  
Cheerios were intelligently designed to do that.
 
2005-09-21 10:12:26 PM  
Still no cure for cancer...
 
2005-09-21 10:21:35 PM  
Thank God the scientific community has stopped freaking out of that whole curing cancer thing. That just sounds teh boring.
 
2005-09-21 10:58:33 PM  
Cheerios were intelligently designed to do that.

I think you win this thread.
 
2005-09-21 10:59:34 PM  
Still no cure for cancer...

Thank God the scientific community has stopped freaking out of that whole curing cancer thing. That just sounds teh boring.


Meanwhile, you two useless sacks are posting shiat on internet message boards instead of finding a cure for cancer.
 
2005-09-21 11:08:46 PM  
It's cold, and they get lonely.
 
2005-09-22 12:06:10 AM  
Cheerios were intelligently designed to do that.

Thread over, you win. What more proof do we need?
 
Yst
2005-09-22 05:33:24 AM  
Actually, wait, I think I just cured cancer.

...


...

Ugh, nope, sorry, false alarm. Stay posted.
 
2005-09-22 05:34:16 AM  
You cannot have "Still no cure for cancer" *and*
img.fark.netView Full Size
.

It should be
img.fark.netView Full Size
.
 
2005-09-22 05:37:48 AM  
it's cereal survival instinct.

/strength in numbers.
 
2005-09-22 05:43:01 AM  
i thought Mr. Wizard already explained this? i definately remember an episode explaining surface tension, even made "motorboats" that had dabs of glue on one end of a floating stick, the surface tension's reaction to the glue propelled the stick across the water. that is, until the glue diluted enough to permanently "break" the tension.
 
2005-09-22 05:43:56 AM  
Kudos to Mordant and Barton! yall just done made me laugh even though im bout to get raped by rita.
im agnostic, so i really, really loved your post Mordant.
 
2005-09-22 05:49:56 AM  
Remember that show that had sniglets. Can't remember the name but I think the sniglet was Cheeriomagnetism.
 
2005-09-22 05:52:00 AM  
I believe Rich Hall defined this property back in 1984:

Cheeriomagnetization (cheer ee oh mag net i zay' shun) n.
The tendency of the last four or five Cheerios in the bowl to cling together for survival.
 
2005-09-22 05:52:18 AM  
"There's a message in my alphabet soup. It says 'OOOOOOOOO'"
 
2005-09-22 05:55:05 AM  
CYberg

The show was Not Necessarily the News on HBO. Funny stuff.

"The U.S. Government: we make money the old-fashioned way -- we just make it!"

/or something like that
 
2005-09-22 06:15:59 AM  
so sick of this "still no cure for cancer" shiat....

science is a passion. if one scientist does not wish to research a cure for cancer then it would be a WASTE of their time and any money used to fund them. Save that money for people who WANT to cure cancer and it will be much more productive dollar for dollar. If the guy who wants to find out why cheerios float together then let him, he is more productive researching what he has a passion for.

/rant
 
2005-09-22 06:17:10 AM  
bloobeary: It's cold, and they get lonely

That actually made me laugh out loud.

So did Yst's post.
Hee!
 
2005-09-22 06:22:40 AM  
Piercedan

I agree 100% That exactly the reason why and explained better than I was going to have to while reading the article. Thanks for saving me the time.
 
2005-09-22 06:25:16 AM  
I believe Piercedan has it about right, though it's possible Cheerios are hydrophobic and that would also contribute sizably.

/Chemical Engineer
//in training
 
2005-09-22 06:27:46 AM  
You guys are close but not quite. There is no such thing as Cheeriomagnetism. Before the milk is poured in the Cheerio Mommys and Daddys have all the little O's buddy up. Kinda a Red Cross lifesaving technique for cereal.
 
2005-09-22 06:35:12 AM  
[image from img371.imageshack.us too old to be available]
 
2005-09-22 06:57:39 AM  
"science is a passion. if one scientist does not wish to research a cure for cancer then it would be a WASTE of their time and any money used to fund them. Save that money for people who WANT to cure cancer and it will be much more productive dollar for dollar. If the guy who wants to find out why cheerios float together then let him, he is more productive researching what he has a passion for."

Not if taxpayer money is used. If he wants to find out why cherios cling together on his own free time, then great for him. If he wants a grant for it, then fark him.
 
2005-09-22 07:16:40 AM  
Star Emperor:

CYberg

The show was Not Necessarily the News on HBO. Funny stuff.

"The U.S. Government: we make money the old-fashioned way -- we just make it!"

/or something like that



Thanks Star Emperor: I could not remember the name, blast from the past for sure. Me and my brother would laff our asses off at that show. Rich Hall was funny stuff.
 
2005-09-22 07:22:06 AM  
Yes yes, I think that people have been getting a lot of the tags switched around recently. What's up with that?
 
2005-09-22 07:25:02 AM  
Still no cure for having milk leftover when you're done eating your cereal.
 
2005-09-22 07:31:20 AM  
"well, you can all just sit in the milk far as i'm concerned..."

/invokes the power of carlin
 
2005-09-22 07:44:37 AM  
SpacePunk

Not if taxpayer money is used. If he wants to find out why cherios cling together on his own free time, then great for him. If he wants a grant for it, then fark him.


Blame the one giving him the grant, not him. And like the article reads, his research has been used in commercial applications.
 
2005-09-22 07:47:18 AM  
It's called Brownian motion, bittches.
 
2005-09-22 07:48:09 AM  
Surface Tension...

the same thing that causes the fluid to rise up the side of the cereal. Fluid Rises up the side of the other cereal-piece and pulls them together.

after reviewing the thread, yes piercedan you are right. IMHO.
 
2005-09-22 07:49:02 AM  
Dubbed the Cheerio Effect by scientists, this clumping phenomenon applies to anything that floats, including fizzy soda bubbles and hair particles in water after a morning shave.

Hehehe, like my pee bubbles.

And yes ladies we play around ALL of the time.
 
2005-09-22 07:56:16 AM  
[image from patriotresource.com too old to be available]

I say we drink the milk, eat the Cheerios, and use the scientists report for musket wadding.

/Cheerios makes a fine meal.
 
2005-09-22 07:56:54 AM  
What happens to Cheerio's flooating in a droplet of milk in zero gravity? Do they still bunch together? The article states

"Place a single Cheerio in a bowl of milk, and its weight will cause the milk beneath it to dip slightly, forming a dent in the once-smooth surface of the milk."

But with no gravity to pull the cheereo down into the milk, will the surface of the milk still be effected.

/someone call NASA, I have an experiment for them.
 
2005-09-22 08:06:31 AM  
All this 'they float together for strength in numbers' makes no sense to me. I eat the groups first, then chase all the singletons floating around. Then again, nobody ever said cheerios were smart...
 
2005-09-22 08:17:31 AM  
Ewww, people still put cow milk on their cereal? Don't you get enough fat in your diet already?
 
2005-09-22 08:32:59 AM  
duckpoopy
Ewww, people still put cow milk on their cereal? Don't you get enough fat in your diet already?

Fark that. It's heavy cream for me.
 
2005-09-22 08:33:25 AM  
Fluffy is on to something. The cheerio holes make depressions in the milk-time continuum.
 
2005-09-22 08:35:37 AM  
I wonder if he's ever looked at a bowl of Cheerios...on weed?!?

/Because I am, right now.
 
2005-09-22 08:45:49 AM  
[image from gasolinealleyantiques.com too old to be available]

Must be part of the cheerios-guided missle defense system.
 
2005-09-22 08:56:27 AM  
pxlboy

Nice to know I wasn't the only one who heard "snap, crackle, fark him". Unfortunately I was reaching for the artifical sweetner at the time and was not looking directly into the bowl.

/you can't sink them, they just come up over the side of the spoon. They gather together into little groups - 2, 4, 10, sometimes 16 but always an even number.
//that's what the fruit is for.
 
2005-09-22 08:59:28 AM  
[image from nastystart.org too old to be available]
 
2005-09-22 09:02:42 AM  
Took me a minute on that headline - here in NZ, and maybe other places "Cheerios" are what you would call "Cocktail Sausages" I think (like bit size versions of savaloys), and are typically served on toothpicks with plenty of tomato sauce at childrens birthday parties.

I don't think they'd go well in milk.

I imagine what you call Cheerios I would call "breakfast cereal consisting mostly of sugar in a box".
 
2005-09-22 09:11:45 AM  
bitsy_boffin

Actually, Cheerios cereal has very little sweetening to it, and is almost salty if you have it without milk. Probably an acquired taste, but I love it. Of course, there are numerous side-products (such as Honey Nut Cheerios, Apple Cinnemon) that are much more sweetened.

/and know we know.
//and knowing is half the battle.
 
2005-09-22 09:15:42 AM  
bitsy_boffin

As a cereal aficionado, I can tell you Cheerios is one of the few breakfast cereals that contain very little sugar. Regular Cheerios contains 1g of sugar per serving. The highest off shoots of regular Cheerios have 13 grams of sugar per serving, which is the same as Lucky Charms.
 
2005-09-22 09:16:43 AM  
All this 'they float together for strength in numbers' makes no sense to me. I eat the groups first, then chase all the singletons floating around. Then again, nobody ever said cheerios were smart...

You're defying Darwinism!
 
2005-09-22 09:18:27 AM  
"We've secretly replaced the milk in the bowl these Cheerios live in, with Sulfuric Acid. Lets watch what happens".

Also- biting all the arms and legs off of animal crackers, save one, makes them swim in circles.
 
2005-09-22 09:27:01 AM  
Whatever floats your Cheerios...it's nice to see something light in the midst of floods, hurricanes, and near plane crashes. If the people in New Orleans had known this theory, would they have all floated to the edge of the city on innertubes?
 
2005-09-22 09:37:33 AM  
- Brian! There's a message in my Alpha Bits, it says "Oooooo!"
- Peter, those are Cheerios.
/Cracks me up everytime.
 
Displayed 50 of 104 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report