Forums → The Tavern → Experimental Breakfast Cereals
| 37 | 5627 |
Me and my brother were talking about this earlier today. this is basically how it went down:
So you know how at wholesale stores, they have those huge, economy sized containers of whatever? I was thinking about what it would be like if they had one of those, but with cereal. And I don't mean like a bunch of boxes taped together, I'm talking about one huge box filled with cereal. They could even make variety packs, just pour a bunch of different cereals in a box and stir it up. Of course, the mixture of Cheerios and Lucky Charms would most likely result in the creation a black hole, thus annihilating all life as we know it. But then again, this is probably the way that most breakfast cereals are invented. They're just unstable isotopes covered in sugar. Add enough radiation and it probably won't explode prior to being ingested. I bet you anything, Fruit Loops are just an untested version of Cheerios. And another thing. Nuclear Frosted Flakes. It's an explosion of flavor! (and toxic waste!)
If you guys/gals have any thoughts on the matter, I would love to hear them.
- 37 Replies
I see, so you're more of the Theoretical Grainics type, hm?
Exactly.
As I understand it, grains with a certain amount of energy can be considered "Sweetonizing food" while others are considered "Non-Sweetonizing foods". With sweetonizing foods, the pure amount of yummy goodness in the cereal causes part of the cereal to flake away, which creates massive emissions of deliciousness as well as the Posta, Millsa, and Kellogsa particles. This is highly dangerous, and may result in the milk spilling out of the bowl(a serious disaster), particularly if a chain reaction occurs. This is why you must use your spoons as control rods to limit the spread of the deliciousness to other flakes in the bowl.
You're behind in the times. The Dairytron Spin theory actually ensures that the particle current formed when substances enter into the bowl actually keeps milk *inside* the bowl, rather than spilling out. If too much milk is added into the bowl, then the Dairytrons react violently, and can cause a Catastrophic Overflow. Same result, different reason.
Sweetonizing Foods v. Non-Sweetonizing Foods harkens back to 'Cereal' and 'Anti-Cereal'. Its really the same principal manifesting itself through another platform, the glucose. The force hijacks the glucose, with the same results.
Postas closely resemble Lucky Charms, in that they have two flakes and two marshmallows per Posta. Their dangerous deliciousness can be easily stopped.
Correct, in an odd way. Postas are made up of two Dairytrons and Two Grainitrons. Recent scans with an ECM have determined that 'Charms' make up the particles in various amounts. Dairytrons are the lightest, Grainitrons are the middle, and Cornitrons are the heaviest, by only slight margins.
***I'm actually comtemplating making a thread discussing the history of Milklear Granics.***
You're behind in the times. The Dairytron Spin theory actually ensures that the particle current formed when substances enter into the bowl actually keeps milk *inside* the bowl, rather than spilling out. If too much milk is added into the bowl, then the Dairytrons react violently, and can cause a Catastrophic Overflow. Same result, different reason.
Once you start getting into things like the Dairytron Spin theory, you have to put the elementary cereal components known as "Chex" (discovered by Murray Milk-Mann) and "brans" into consideration.
Sweetonizing Foods v. Non-Sweetonizing Foods harkens back to 'Cereal' and 'Anti-Cereal'. Its really the same principal manifesting itself through another platform, the glucose. The force hijacks the glucose, with the same results.
Indeed you are right, but many do not make the connection, being that Sweetonizing foods react due to massive amounts of deliciousness whereas cereal and anti-cereal are created by Millsa flakes that naturally occur in the bowl.
Also, you also forgot to mention Pour Dirac, who is certainly a big name in your field of Theoretical Grainics. For shame!
Once you start getting into things like the Dairytron Spin theory, you have to put the elementary cereal components known as "Chex" (discovered by Murray Milk-Mann) and "brans" into consideration.
How could I forget? My knowledge of theoretical Granics does not extend to the practicalities of the notions.
Dirac? I have not heard of him.
I will make the thread, tomorrow. There we can continue our discussion on-topic, because itseems we've hijacked this thead. XD
Dirac? I have not heard of him.
Really?
Sadly, I could find no reference to "Pour Dirac"(such is the fate of the Milklear Granicist), but here is a piece on his identical twin brother, Paul.
I will make the thread, tomorrow. There we can continue our discussion on-topic, because itseems we've hijacked this thead. XD
Yep...it would appear so.
Ya know, I had no idea that there was anyone as gung-ho about cereal as you two.
Ya know, I had no idea that there was anyone as gung-ho about cereal as you two.
I have spoken to each of them and they are both incredibly smart. Considering that I am saying that, it should be apparent that they are just that much smarter.
Also, I will be contributing to the Milklear Grainics Thread along with the two of them.
Ya know, I had no idea that there was anyone as gung-ho about cereal as you two.
You do realize...we're not actually talking about cereal.
It's about radiation, nuclear and theoretical physics, etc.
Don't make me translate everything for you.
You must be logged in to post a reply!