The Physics of Disney's Beauty and the Beast
robert ito
One of the more dramatic moments in Disney's "Beauty and the Beast"
occurs when Gaston stabs the Beast, and the Beast starts to fall
off the castle wall to his impending death. Belle quickly reaches
for the Beast, grabs him, and breaks his fall. But you have to
wonder if this slender (if tall) young woman could really catch
and hold someone as large as the Beast. Here we'll try to analyze
the physics of this situation and answer that question.
But first, my thanks to David Uy, Amberle 'Meg' :-) Ferrian, Jeff
Wilson and Tim Pickett for catching and correcting all the mistakes
I'd originally made because of my rusty physics, and for all their
very helpful comments.
This isn't exactly a nice, neat textbook problem, so first let's
write down our:
===============
ASSUMPTIONS
===============
1. The Beast's height = 7'0" = 213.4 cm. It's not too easy to
estimate his height, since his usual posture is hunched over,
but if you think back to when Belle and the Beast are dancing
during the ballroom scene, that should give you the best idea
of their relative heights. (For reference, use Amberle's
estimate that Belle is about 5'7".)
2. Beast's weight = 600 lb = 272.2 kg. The Beast, especially in
his upper body, is very broad and very massive. Now, Shaquille
O'Neal is about the same height, and he weighs about 300 pounds,
so based on the Beast's proportions my guess is that he weighs
at least twice what Shaq does.
Also, Jeff suggested approximating the Beast as a right circular
cone. I tried something a little different: Treat the Beast
as two cones, base to base, with the bases meeting at his
center of mass (see #3). Let h = height of the shorter cone =
height(Beast) / 3. Then the combined volume of the two cones
is pi * r^2 * h. Assume that r = 35 cm = 13.78", and that the
Beast is as dense as water. Then v = 2.736 x 10^5 cm^3, and
mass = 273.6 kg, which is almost the same as what I'd guessed
above. So 600 pounds is in the right ballpark.
3. The Beast's center of mass (c.m.) is at his chest level, or
2/3rds of his height, or 4'8", or 142.2 cm. The Beast is,
after all, definitely top-heavy, so his c.m. is above his
mid-point. Also, when analyzing forces and torques later,
we'll treat the Beast as a point mass located at his c.m.
4. Belle grabbed the Beast at his chest level, or at his center
of mass, as Amberle verified from her laserdisc. Also, Belle's
force is exerted entirely in the +x direction, so there's no
component of force in the +y or -y direction.
5. This is a static equilibrium problem. That is, the Beast is
stationary (at least momentarily) when Belle catches him, so
he's not accelerating in any direction or around any axis.
This means that the vector sum of all external forces on the
Beast is zero, and the same is true for the external torques.
6. The Beast can be treated as a rigid beam.
7. The Beast is hinged to the wall. It looks like the Beast has
his feet on the edge of the balcony, with his toes curled up
and over the edge. That should keep his feet from slipping
down the outer vertical surface of the balcony, or across the
flat horizontal (and slick-with-rain) surface. Ordinarily
we'd have to worry about the frictional forces that would keep
his feet from slipping, but that shouldn't be necessary here.
8. The Beast is leaning at about 30 degrees from the vertical.
(This was measured by Amberle off her laserdisc.)
===============
CONVENTIONS
===============
Just to keep things straight:
1. The +y direction is up. The +x direction is directed horizon-
tally and perpendicularly inwards towards the balcony (and will
be drawn as directed towards the right, to follow convention).
And +z is towards us.
2. A torque acting in the clockwise direction is negative, and
counterclockwise is positive. (This agrees with the vector
equation for torques, T = r x F.)
3. Angles are in degrees.
================
CALCULATIONS
================
1. THE FORCES ON THE BEAST
For the forces on the Beast we have these three vectors:
* W(beast), the force of gravity on the Beast.
Origin = c.m.(beast) (the Beast's center of mass)
Direction = straight down, or in the -y direction
Magnitude = 272.2 kg * 9.807 m/s^2 = 2669.5 newtons (N)
(1 newton = 1 kg-m/s^2)
* F(belle), the force Belle exerts on the Beast.
Origin = c.m.(beast)
Direction = +x direction
Magnitude = TBD (this is what we're trying to solve for)
* F(wall), the force exerted on the Beast by the wall/balcony.
Origin = point of contact between the wall/balcony
and the Beast's feet
Direction = in the -x / +y direction, at some TBD angle
Magnitude = TBD
If we draw a diagram of the force vectors acting on the Beast, it
looks like this:
_
\
\ F(wall)
\
(c.m.)-----> F(belle)
|
|
| W(beast)
v
Since this is a static situation, the vector sum of these forces
is zero, and:
F(belle) + W(beast) + F(wall) = 0
2. ANALYSIS OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE FORCES
For the force components in the y-direction, the sum is also zero.
If we write the y-component of F(wall) as F(wall,y), then:
0 = W(beast) + F(wall,y)
= ( 272.2 kg * - 9.807 m/s^2 ) + F(wall,y)
or:
F(wall,y) = 272.2 kg * 9.807 m/s^2
= 2669.5 N
For the force components in the x-direction:
F(belle) + F(wall,x) = 0
But as David made clear, we really can't say much about either of
these yet. So we have one equation with two unknowns, and we can't
calculate F(belle) this way.
3. ANALYSIS OF THE TORQUES
Since we can't calculate F(belle) by analyzing the forces, let's
look at the torques. For the magnitudes of the torques involved,
David pointed out that we can write:
T = the net torque around the origin
= 0
= sum (over i) [ r(i) * F(i) * sin(theta(i)) ]
= ( 1.422m * W(beast) * sin(30) ) +
( - 1.422m * F(belle) * sin(60) ) +
( 0 * F(wall) * sin(??) )
In this case, the origin, or the point through which the axis of
rotation runs, is where the Beast has his feet on the wall/balcony.
And note that since we're working with magnitudes here, and not
vectors, convention #2 makes the terms add up correctly (to zero).
To try to clarify the equations above: Suppose we apply a force
F(i) to a particle m(i) at a distance r(i) away from the origin O
(as shown in the diagram here).
_
^ /
: / <-- F(i)
F(i) : /
(perp.)--> : /
: / theta(i)
:/
m(i)<-------------------------(O)
r(i)
What's the magnitude of the torque on m(i) due to F(i)? Among
other things, it depends on the angle theta(i) between r(i) and
F(i). If F(i) is parallel to r(i), there's no torque, as such
a force wouldn't cause m(i) to rotate around O. So, for torques
we want the component of F(i) that's perpendicular to r(i).
That's F(i) (perp.) above, and that has a magnitude of F(i) *
sin(theta(i)). If F(i) and r(i) are parallel, then theta(i) is
0 or 180, and sin(theta(i)) = 0, and there's no torque. If
theta(i) = 90, F(i) is perpendicular to r(i), and all of the
force contributes to the torque.
Returning to the torque equation, let's first cancel out the
r(i)'s, since W(beast) and F(belle) are both acting on the Beast's
center of mass, and r(i) is the same for both contributions to
the torque. Also, r(i) for F(wall) is 0, so F(wall) doesn't
contribute to the torque. Rearranging gives us:
W(beast) * sin(30) = F(belle) * sin(60)
or:
F(belle) = W(beast) * sin(30) / sin(60)
= 2669.5 N * 0.5 / 0.866
= 1541.2 N (or 157.2 kg force!)
Now, at the very VERY most, Belle weighs 60 kg, or 132.3 pounds
(while she's tall, she's also rather slender), so Belle's catching
of the Beast is truly a Herculean feat. After all, she's pulling
over 2 1/2 times her weight, if not three times her weight.
And as Amberle pointed out, this is only the force needed to keep
the Beast from falling. Belle would have to exert an even greater
force to stop the Beast's fall, or to pull the Beast back up to
the balcony. The calculation of that force, and the work done by
Belle, is left as an exercise to the reader :-).
Also, if you look again at the equations above, you'll see that
if Belle grabs the Beast below his center of mass, F(belle) will
have to be larger - and vice versa. And if Belle had applied
her force perpendicular to the Beast's axis (instead of at the
smaller angle that was assumed), she would've made things easier
for herself. In that case, F(belle) = 1334.8 N or 136.1 kg force.
4. A WORST CASE SCENARIO
Jeff noted that we can rewrite the above as:
F(belle) = W(beast) * sin(theta) / sin(90 - theta)
= W(beast) * sin(theta) / cos(theta)
= W(beast) * tan(theta)
where theta is the angle the Beast makes from the vertical. As
theta increases, so does F(belle).
For a worst case scenario, let's say that the Beast is 7'6" and
300 kg (as Amberle had initially assumed), and that he's leaning
out at 45 degrees. Then:
F(belle) = W(beast) * tan(45)
= 300 kg * 9.807 m/s^2 * 1
= 2942.1 N (or 300 kg force!)
which is a lot worse than the previous number we came up with.
This is clearly impossible.
Also, let's guess that at most Belle could exert an F(belle)
equal to her weight, which we'll take to be 60 kg. Then, using
W(beast) = 272.2 kg again, we can calculate the largest angle at
which Belle could support the Beast, which is:
= arctan( F(belle) / W(Beast) )
= arctan( 60 / 272.2 )
= 12.4 degrees
=====================
FURTHER EXERCISES
=====================
And, just for fun :-), here's some further exercises for the reader.
1. Remember the scene where the Beast grabs Gaston by the throat
and then holds him out at arm's length in mid-air? What's
the torque due to Gaston's weight? It must be large, although
this is probably not as impressive a feat as Belle's catching
of the Beast. (Assume that Gaston weighs 250 pounds, or 113.4
kg, and that the Beast's arm is about a meter long ...)
2. What force did Belle exert when she swung that tree branch
and knocked the wolf off Philippe's back? An average wolf is
pretty heavy - about 75 pounds or 34.0 kg - so this is no mean
feat, obviously.
One way to think about this, I'd guess, is to consider two
problems that are similar (in one, you swing a tree branch, in
the other a baseball bat): (1) the change in momentum imparted
to the wolf by Belle, which isn't too hard to calculate (with
an assumption or two), and (2) the delta(m*v) needed to knock
a major league fastball over the fence in dead center field.
Bob "Yojimbo" Ito <i...@alumni.cs.colorado.edu; ri...@nyx.cs.du.edu>
Chief Editor, Disney Comics in The Future Disney Cabinet,
bodyguard to the FDC walkaround Belle, and Jasmine,
and part-time Walkaround Grumpy.
"Is it, err, Mildred? Okay, no. How 'bout - Diana? Rachel?"
Stephen Lord
and tension of that moment in the film...
I was deeply moved...
Brilliant!
Dingbat
E-mail:--> din...@original.demon.co.uk
TM
: One of the more dramatic moments in Disney's "Beauty and the Beast"
: ===============
: ASSUMPTIONS
: ===============
: ===============
: CONVENTIONS
: ===============
: ================
: CALCULATIONS
: ================
: or:
: = 2669.5 N
: = 0
: or:
: = W(beast) * tan(theta)
: = 12.4 degrees
: =====================
: FURTHER EXERCISES
: =====================
Oh my God, I hope this is a joke.
You remind me of two friend of mine who had a fistfight over who the
better captian is.
Here's the answer of how Belle caught the Beast.
1) the beast had fur, thusly there was a lowered terminal velocity.
2) she was on 'roids.
3) probably a lie. You know how those Disney characters are.
I must say though, this is a cool way to tackle mechanics. wish
my prof. taught it that way; then I'd actually know this stuff.
"TM"
Geoff Thomas
[horrendously complex physics calculation skipped... geez! now I know why I
did Comp Sci! :/ :) ]
Ok, so you've managed to come up with something to determine... well
something! Now answer this one:
How does Belle get Beast onto Philippe (sp) after the battle with
the wolves?
This time, it's not a case of pulling a balanced object one way or another;
Belle must actually *lift* Beast off the ground, up some distance, and onto
Philippe's back, which at best could be no lower than 2 feet. That's 7'0"
of rather heavy Beast lifted directly up by 2 feet... not an easy task for
such a woman as Belle; no leverage, centre of mass shifting all over the
place as Beast's arms and legs dangle about...
Put *that* in your physics formulas and solve it! >:)
MC
Geoff Thomas geof...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz
---FDC:---
Flyaround Magic Carpet, Pixieguard for Ms. Tinker Bell,
<mew>-around Simba - Lion King, HoloDisney Executive Engineer,
"Yaaah!"-around Kermit the Frog.
Tom Tanida
>robert ito (ri...@nyx10.cs.du.edu) wrote:
>
>[horrendously complex physics calculation skipped... geez! now I know why I
>did Comp Sci! :/ :) ]
>
>Ok, so you've managed to come up with something to determine... well
>something! Now answer this one:
>
> How does Belle get Beast onto Philippe (sp) after the battle with
> the wolves?
Actually, this question, plus the one on how Belle knocked the
wolf off Philippe's back, plus how she held the Beast up to begin
with can all be answered with one simple hypothesis:
Belle has superhuman strength.
There is no point in the movie which contradicts this (in fact, she was
probably getting ready to wipe out the wolves herself when the
Beast came along). Also, early in the movie, she called the village a
"little town, full of little people". Obviously, she was subordinating
them based on their inferior intellects and physical abilities.
Or, maybe normal physical laws don't apply when you're animated. :-)
Take any Warner Bros. short (or Roger Rabbit short, if you're a Disney
purist) to prove this.
-Tom
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Tanida | "The above limited edition message will be available
Software Engineer | for a short time only, never again to be re-released
tan...@gso.saic.com | in its original form."
John Courtney Howard
Cool.
How much time did you spend on this? It looks like quite a bit of
work!!!!
John
Official FDC Swimming-Around
Flounder
"I am not a guppy!"
Eric Shafto
: robert ito (ri...@nyx10.cs.du.edu) wrote:
: [horrendously complex physics calculation skipped... geez! now I know why I
: did Comp Sci! :/ :) ]
: Ok, so you've managed to come up with something to determine... well
: something! Now answer this one:
: How does Belle get Beast onto Philippe (sp) after the battle with
: the wolves?
If you look carefully at frame number 35724, you can see damage to the
limb of a tree that could well have been caused by a block and tackle
setup.
Actually, I have wondered the same thing myself.
--
*Eric Shafto * I hope...to see the day when...in...our country*
*Institute for the * we won't have any public schools. The churches*
* Learning Sciences * will have taken them over and Christians will *
*Northwestern University * be running them. What a happy day that will *
* * be! -Rev. Jerry Fallwell, on vouchers. *
chuck cilek
Tom Tanida <tan...@seismo.CSS.GOV> wrote:
>In article <CnLKG...@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz>
geof...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:
>> the wolves?
>
>wolf off Philippe's back, plus how she held the Beast up to begin
>with can all be answered with one simple hypothesis:
> Belle has superhuman strength.
>
[munch]
Well, if Belle has superhuman strength, why does she try to use
the magic mirror to save her father instead of just kicking some
primaeval butt? Why does Belle wait in the cellar to get rescued
by a teacup?
The answer is simple: Belle does not have superhuman strength.
*** Belle has the power of levitation! ***
This hypothesis explains both how she catches Beast as well
as how she puts Beast on Philippe's back. Belle's power is
obviously limited to objects she can touch, thus she levitated
the wolf with the tree branch, but when she lost contact, the
wolf fell. This also explains why she wasn't hurt when she was
thrown down in the cellar. Also as I think about it, this also
explains how Gaston flies such a long distance when he falls
out Belle's door.
I hope this clears everything up.
--
"So who do you think would win the fight, Superman or Mighty Mouse?"
"That's a really stupid question. Mighty Mouse is a cartoon
character. Superman is real." - _Stand by Me_
Amberle S Ferrian
Tom Tanida <tan...@seismo.CSS.GOV> wrote:
>In article <CnLKG...@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz> geof...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:
>
>Actually, this question, plus the one on how Belle knocked the
>wolf off Philippe's back, plus how she held the Beast up to begin
>with can all be answered with one simple hypothesis:
> Belle has superhuman strength.
True, but it's more elegant to prove it, as Bob's analysis suggests. Let's
face it, a 170 cm, 50 kg (not 60, Bob, unless you count right after
Thanksgiving :-) woman cannot pull over three times her own weight.
>There is no point in the movie which contradicts this (in fact, she was
>probably getting ready to wipe out the wolves herself when the
>Beast came along).
Actually, I'd think this particular point *does* contradict it. If Belle
had superhuman strength, she wouldn't bother fighting the wolves with a mere
stick, she'd tackle them with her bare hands. Or, at least she'd pull out
her nunchakus (sp?) that she bought to fend off Gaston after reading some
of Bruce Lee's kung fu books. :-)
>Or, maybe normal physical laws don't apply when you're animated. :-)
Anyone got that "Toon Laws of Physics" article that's been floating around
here and r.a.a not too far back?
---
Amberle Ferrian <amb...@epx.cis.umn.edu>
Writer/Not Ready For ToonTown Player
for upcoming "Disney Channel Improv Nite" show
theme-park walkaround Belle
and general Sherri Stoner fan/wannabe in the Future Disney Cabinet
Geoff Thomas
> In article <CnLKG...@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz> geof...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:
> > How does Belle get Beast onto Philippe (sp) after the battle with
> > the wolves?
> Belle has superhuman strength.
Yep, that's about all it could be, except maybe...
> Or, maybe normal physical laws don't apply when you're animated. :-)
> Take any Warner Bros. short (or Roger Rabbit short, if you're a Disney
> purist) to prove this.
Yes. This seems more likely. If there's magic, one can reasonably safely
assume that physics etc. don't apply too well. Sorry Bob, Jeff, Amberle and
everyone else working on that thing; it's a load of rubbish! :) but a good,
well thought out load of rubbish with all hypothoses tested! :)
Remember the cartoon rules of physics post that occassionally gets posted
around, with stuff like gravity moving in slow waves (esp. if you're Wile E.
Coyote and you're above a large vertical drop)...
Simba, making an appearance <Mew!>
Ron Bauerle
In article D...@news.cis.umn.edu, amb...@epx.cis.umn.edu (Amberle S Ferrian) writes:
>In article <2nie7t$n...@seismo.css.gov>,
>Anyone got that "Toon Laws of Physics" article that's been floating around
>here and r.a.a not too far back?
I've sort of been keeping it up - since it's only 7k, I'm thinking of
posting it to r.a.d and r.a.a every two months - good idea, or bad idea?
RDB
FDC King Triton
>posting it to r.a.d and r.a.a every two months - good idea, or bad idea?
>
--
King Triton, ruler of Atlantica and the Oceans and arms dealer offers the best
in super-soakers and other supplies, so come on down to Triton's Tank for your
weapon needs. If we don't have it, we'll find it or make just for you. Specialdiscounts and selections to FDC members and preferred customres.
Amberle S Ferrian
chuck cilek <cci...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>*** Belle has the power of levitation! ***
>
>This hypothesis explains both how she catches Beast as well
>as how she puts Beast on Philippe's back. Belle's power is
>obviously limited to objects she can touch, thus she levitated
>the wolf with the tree branch, but when she lost contact, the
>wolf fell. This also explains why she wasn't hurt when she was
>thrown down in the cellar. Also as I think about it, this also
>explains how Gaston flies such a long distance when he falls
>out Belle's door.
Then why didn't she pass this power on to her walkarounds? You gotta admit
that being able to levitate water thrown at me would be useful around here.
Believe me, water is something I'm very much in touch with these days...
:-)
Robert Cook
>In article <CnLKG...@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz> geof...@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:
>>
>> How does Belle get Beast onto Philippe (sp) after the battle with
>> the wolves?
>
>Actually, this question, plus the one on how Belle knocked the
>wolf off Philippe's back, plus how she held the Beast up to begin
>with can all be answered with one simple hypothesis:
Well, if someone hits me on the face with a big stick when I'm on a
horse's back, I'd probably get knocked off, too. Maybe it's not as
hard as it might seem when we only consider dead weights.
How did Belle get Beast on Philippe's back? They didn't show us, so
my guess would be that Beast might not have been completely
unconscious, just too tired and woozy to walk, but not so much that
he couldn't climb onto a kneeling Philippe. He seemed okay later.
> Belle has superhuman strength.
That's the only way I can explain that one moment, a single second
on the screen, where she's holding him up all by herself. In some
scenes he has a hand on the balcony, but while Gaston is falling, he
doesn't.
>There is no point in the movie which contradicts this (in fact, she was
>probably getting ready to wipe out the wolves herself when the
>Beast came along).
Indeed, I think that she is in fact a shape-shifting creature. It's
not all that uncommon in animation (look at the Genie), and it's
evident by the fact that Belle had some difficulty maintaining a
consistent look throughout the film (it takes a lot of concentration,
and Gaston was annoying). When the wolf foolishly tried to attack
her when she was down, she hid her face and was about to reveal her
true nature to us (and the unfortunate wolf), but Beast interfered.
Look at the part where Beast was about to leap--Belle's eyes were
bulging in an obvious attempt to revert to her original form.
>Also, early in the movie, she called the village a
>"little town, full of little people". Obviously, she was subordinating
>them based on their inferior intellects and physical abilities.
Some of us may notice that she can change size during the film.
Watch how she appears to be as big as Gaston, in relation to Beast,
but then appear to be much smaller than Gaston. It was a clever
plot on her part to make her seem helpless or weak at the right
moments, and I believe that she was manipulating the story all
along. I also propose that she did this in the very beginning as
well--playing the part of the feeble old beggarwoman, in her
shape-shifting ways. I guess now we know what became of the
Enchantress....
>Or, maybe normal physical laws don't apply when you're animated. :-)
They don't apply to me either, and I'm not animated. <shrug>
Neither am I.
>Take any Warner Bros. short (or Roger Rabbit short, if you're a Disney
>purist) to prove this.
Ah, but if you're a real Disney purist, you wouldn't mention Roger
Rabbit at all. Ooh, that's gonna draw some flames. :-)
Well, anyway, I'd like to thank you all for aiding me in revealing
the truth behind Belle's role in Beauty and the Beast. Disney
should just fess up and get it overwith, I say. ;-)
- Robert Cook
Mimi Zhou
>In article <2nie7t$n...@seismo.CSS.GOV> tan...@seismo.CSS.GOV (Tom Tanida) writes:
>>Belle has superhuman strength.
>
>That's the only way I can explain that one moment, a single second
>on the screen, where she's holding him up all by herself. In some
>scenes he has a hand on the balcony, but while Gaston is falling, he
>doesn't.
>
used to anchor himself on the balconey. And since he must be quite strong
in the lower body, some help from Belle could probably get him up.
-Mimi
Robert Cook
>In article <2nie7t$n...@seismo.css.gov>, Tom Tanida <tan...@seismo.CSS.GOV> wrote:
>>
>>There is no point in the movie which contradicts this (in fact, she was
>>probably getting ready to wipe out the wolves herself when the
>>Beast came along).
>
>Actually, I'd think this particular point *does* contradict it. If Belle
>had superhuman strength, she wouldn't bother fighting the wolves with a mere
>stick, she'd tackle them with her bare hands.
Because they'd bite her? CHOMP! WOOO! YOWW! MAMA! THAT HURT!
Seriously though, it would too easily reveal her secret identity as
the shape-shifting Enchantress. :-) I know I'm right about this....
>>Or, maybe normal physical laws don't apply when you're animated. :-)
>
>Anyone got that "Toon Laws of Physics" article that's been floating around
>here and r.a.a not too far back?
Remember that whatever you can say in that article, the opposite is
also true.
- Robert Cook
FDC King Triton
>that an elderly lady had been present when her grandchild was caught under
>a car after an accident. She then proceeded to lift the car up so that
>some bystander could extract the child from under the car!
>
I remember reading an article about a similar incident. One problem with
an adrenaline rush like that, after the rush is over, the body is gonna get
really messed up.
A mother's child is stuck under a car....she panics....adrenaline rush gives
her strength to life to car to save child....after rush....muscles torn,
ligaments, muscles, and tendons strained beyond normal, micro damages to
bone cells....etc.
Rogelio Antonio Padilla
Roger H. Kim <roge...@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> wrote:
>Has anyone here considered the factor of adrenline kicking in at tense,
>life-or-death situations? I believe that I saw in a news clipping once
>that an elderly lady had been present when her grandchild was caught under
>a car after an accident. She then proceeded to lift the car up so that
>some bystander could extract the child from under the car!
>
>be able to summon up the reserves of strength to find the ability to save
>him...
>
>Also, since I'm a hopeless romantic, I believe that the power of love was
>more than sufficient to keep him from falling. =)
>
>Roger Kim
>FDC Walkaround Prince Eric
>FDC Walkaround Aladdin (Mon/Wed/Sat)
Hey, I like this one the best!
Anthony
Amberle S Ferrian
chuck cilek <cci...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>In article <CnpzH...@news.cis.umn.edu>,
>Amberle S Ferrian <amb...@epx.cis.umn.edu> wrote:
>>In article <1994Apr2.1...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>,
>>chuck cilek <cci...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>*** Belle has the power of levitation! ***
>
>>that being able to levitate water thrown at me would be useful around here.
>>Believe me, water is something I'm very much in touch with these days...
>
>in the liquid state. The levitation power only works on single objects,
>so you can probably levitate small drops, but not the whole bucket.
>If the water were ice, this power might work.
But I live in Minnesota. Water here is found *only* in the solid state
BY DEFINITION...
>Perhaps the
>FDC walkaround physicist, Bob "Yojimbo" Ito knows? Bob? :-)
Not a walkaround (we've got enough of those here anyway!), but a physicist
working on the FDC SDI (SuperSoaker Drenching Initiative) Labs...
chuck cilek
Amberle S Ferrian <amb...@epx.cis.umn.edu> wrote:
>In article <1994Apr4.1...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>,
>chuck cilek <cci...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>>In article <CnpzH...@news.cis.umn.edu>,
>>Amberle S Ferrian <amb...@epx.cis.umn.edu> wrote:
>>>In article <1994Apr2.1...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>,
>>>chuck cilek <cci...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>*** Belle has the power of levitation! ***
>>
>>>Then why didn't she pass this power on to her walkarounds? You gotta admit
>>>that being able to levitate water thrown at me would be useful around here.
>>>Believe me, water is something I'm very much in touch with these days...
>>
>>I'm not sure. It may have something to do the fact that the water is
>>in the liquid state. The levitation power only works on single objects,
>>so you can probably levitate small drops, but not the whole bucket.
>>If the water were ice, this power might work.
>
>But I live in Minnesota. Water here is found *only* in the solid state
>BY DEFINITION...
So you want to know the truth? Umm, er the truth? Well, to have the
power of levitation, you need the Mystic Blue Diamond. Yeah, that's it.
--
"Hello, Doctor."
"Not that one."
Robert Cook
>
>But I live in Minnesota. Water here is found *only* in the solid state
>BY DEFINITION...
AHH HAH! So THAT's where Walt Disney is now! ;-)
- Robert Cook
Amberle S Ferrian
Well, the BatB World on Ice show *did* go through town the other week.
What do you think they were skating on? :-)
ObMightyDucksBash: I wonder what's *really* in that ice rink at Arrowhead
Pond...
lar3ry gensch
>ObMightyDucksBash: I wonder what's *really* in that ice rink at Arrowhead
>Pond...
Smart *ss reply follows: (hit 'n' now)
If that's the case, don't order any "Franks" there...
(Don't flame me... I'm just the piano player)
--
(void) lar3ry(); lar...@world.std.com
"A theme park near Paris makes the revenues go down...
In the most expensive way." -- _DIS' 'n' DAT_ / March 1994