Homepage
• • • • •
Past News
• • • • •
Instruments
• • • • •
Research Papers ::::
• • • • •
The Sciencist Shop
• • • • •
Comments &
Submissions
• • • • •
Site Map

Energy Potential of Molecular Tickle-Technology:
Resonant Frequency and Frenetic Methane

Danylo Burdenko
and
Kohle Torgenson

The search for plentiful, robust, and cost-effective sources of energy has traditionally been an up-hill slow-boat of repeated failure, international scepticism, and apocryphal methodology. In recent years, however, researchers have become exponentially intrigued by a model that finds its root in one of the most basic of organometric activity—the tickle. Modern science has barely scratched the surface of tickle-based energy potential. This paper describes laboratory testing of tickle models and explores the theory of the atomic-level molecular tickle as a source of energy.

[This paper is also available in PDF format]

Introduction

In the earliest human historical records (Cave Paintings, circa 10,000 BCE), the act of tickling appears as a comedic device employed by grandfathers, dark artisans and self-professed party animals the world over. In ancient China, documents found with in tombs of bygone imperial magistrates depict the use of the tickle as a remedy prescribed by rural physicians for lethargy and another common disease thought to be caused by ducks (Jian Guo, 493 BCE; Xiao Fan Zhi, 230 BCE). Nordic legend says that elves invented tickling, and caused its peculiar and pleasant gyrations in mammals, fish, and a sub-human class known as Skrælings (roughly translated as ragamuffins in modern tongues) (Hrothgar, 916). Certain Aristotelian “proof” of this elfish influence caused the Church to ban tickling in all its forms in the early thirteenth century—although this ban was later rescinded by Pope Pius IV when its potential as a conversionary tactic was realized by Jesuit missionaries in Upper Amazonia (Irmão Paulo de Baía, 1550).

As has been shown, from most primitive times, the tickle has been a catalyst in the relationship between man and his sharp, hither and dither convulsive fits of energetic movement. Remarkably, there exists little research surrounding the modern tickle (Burdenko & Torgenson, 2004); consequently, few questions related to it have been sufficiently answered: Why are some more ticklish than others? Can the ticklish zones of the human body be mapped? What is the stimulation index of regulation Army issue French Ticklers? This vacuum in the scientific record has caused some to dub the tickle one of six “modern bugbears of science” (McMurray, 1999). Though these questions may prove interesting ice-breakers within the realm of sophistry, they provide desperately little information related to the energy resource potential found in harnessing the response to the common household tickle—and hence the purpose of this paper. To this end, we seek an understanding of the tickle, and attempt to assess its potential that would seem to contradict Newton’s third law of motion, which, as even most Belgians will recall, states that “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”

 

Method

Reducing the tickle to its dominant movement patterns is the ideal point from which this scientific examination may begin. In essence, the tickle may be described as a small, appropriately directed action that produces a greater general reaction. With this in mind, an appropriately directed tickling motion, applied to a molecule, could create a strong, high-energy response.

In this experiment, molecular models will have directionally controlled stimulation or ‘tickle stimulation.’ In order to elicit a controlled, experimental relationship between tickle response and relative size, three different models of a methane molecule were constructed out of silicone rubber (durometer hardness of 40). The hydrogen atoms compared to carbon atoms were constructed with a 1:12 mass ratio for the three different models of atoms. The hydrogen atoms were then fixed to the carbon atom in a tetrahedral arrangement at angles of 104º, using stainless steel springs (figure 1). The three models, from largest to smallest were hung using 30 lb test fishing line from the ceiling and ‘tickled’ using a standard index finger (Williamson, 1978), 7.54 cm long with fingernail trimmed to a length of 7.44 mm past the cuticle—resulting in 0.12 N of force per tickle movement (see Williamson’s [1980] discussion of “Up or Down, Never Both,” pp. 35–48). The resonant frequency and relative energy of each methane model were recorded respectively.

 

Results

The resulting resonant frequency of each model (table 1) indicates that as the methane molecule decreases in size the hydrogen atoms produced greater resonant energy than was put on the central carbon atom. This would indicate that the ‘tickling’ effect did indeed create a larger energy than was put onto the molecule by the finger. What was of particular interest is that the smaller the molecule the greater the oscillation of the hydrogen atoms, indicating a correlation between the relative tickling energy and diminutive nature of the recipient.

 

Conclusions

Quite clearly, the clinical results of this experiment suggest that as the size of a compound tetrahedral structure decreases, the resonance of bonded elements increases in frequency. The result of tickling a standard methane molecule, which has a near infinitely small mass of 2.66 x 10-23g, would produce a frequency, and by extension, resonant energy, so massive as to proverbially blow one’s socks off.

The difficulty remains, however, in constructing a finger—or mechanical finger-like apparatus—small enough to tickle a molecular sized molecule at a ‘ticklish spot’. Until recently, the limits of micro-technology have prevented such a creation. The advent of nano-technology holds great promise, although most experts agree that a finger is too complicated for contemporary nano-construction techniques. We, therefore, suggest that nano-resources be directed toward the development of a nano-feather (see figure 2).

With the advent of the nano-feather, it is conceivable to develop a long, rigid carbon chain of nano-feathers that could stimulate many methane molecules simultaneously, producing a large enough source of energy to consider tickle-technology as an alternate power source for the future.

 

Discussion

While this study teases the imagination and stimulates thoughts of limitless energy, it is important to consider the gravity of disproving Newton’s third law of motion. The reality of getting more energy from a tickled molecule than was put into it begs the questions of where exactly this newfound energy comes from, and if molecules can become immune to tickling over time. Such questions will need to be answered before commercial and public applications of nano-feather technology could be applied.

Certainly, the serious ramifications of this technology will ensure that ‘small, appropriately directed actions that produce a greater general reaction’ are no laughing matter. Questions remain as to the potential energy found in tickling ivory and modern synthetic ivory substitutes such as nitrocellulose [C6H8(NO2)2O5], while the race for a molecular structure for one’s fancy continues.

References

Burdenko, D. & Torgenson, K. (2004). Energy potential of molecular tickle-technology: Resonant frequency and frenetic methane. The Sciencist, 2(1).
Cave Paintings. (circa 10,000 BCE). Gland, Switzerland.
Jian Guo. (493 BCE). 鸭脑炎记.
Hrothgar. (916). Personal diary.
Irmão Paulo de Baía. (1550). Personal diary.
McMurray, L. (1999). A greater challenge than we had envisioned: Science left unsolved. Scientific Journal of Discoveries in the Sciences, 23(1), pp. 67-75.
Williamson, N. (1978). Double your pleasure: The two-finger tickle and its implications for the entertainment and custodial industries. Frankenmuth, MI: Gondolier Press.
Williamson, N. (1980). Instrumental pleasure. Frankenmuth, MI: Gondolier Press.
Xiao Fan Zhi. (230 BCE). 无精神咒记.